Hi Platt,
Thank you for yet more encouragement!
I feel sure Plato and Aristotle felt quality was able to be taught.
This marks them both out as sophists in my view.
The sticking point for both Plato and Aristotle is a move towards absolute
truth; the birth of science; but they both did have a good grasp of what
quality was all about?
Quality is ineffable, but all around us non the less; teaching it involves
approaching quality from a tangential route; a direct assault appears
confusing.
Please do not put me in the same camp as John B?
With the greatest respect, if John B feels quality is teachable then i have
not found much evidence of such in his writing; i feel there is conflation
and confusion in his work.
Well, please do not feel i am some sort of hero?
If i feel quality is teachable, my belief is based upon ideas which have
already been discussed thousands of years ago...
What goes around comes around! ;)
It is to people such as yourself who i turn to for guidance and comment.
Many thanks,
And best wishes,
Squonk. :-)
In a message dated 8/30/01 9:37:33 PM GMT Daylight Time, pholden@sc.rr.com
writes:
<< Subj: Re: MD Meta-Level
Date: 8/30/01 9:37:33 PM GMT Daylight Time
From: pholden@sc.rr.com (Platt Holden)
Sender: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
Reply-to: moq_discuss@moq.org
To: moq_discuss@moq.org
Hi Squonk, John B., Bo, All:
You've carved our a helluva challenge for yourself--finding the secret to
teaching quality, if indeed it can be taught at all. I think John Beasley
may be on the same quest.
I suggest that there's a difference between quality as generally thought
of in an SOM sense where the word points to a specific sensation or
perception of better/worse and Quality (with a capital Q) in the MOQ
sense where the word means experience. I'm not sure I know myself
just what the difference between quality and Quality is, but that there is
a difference I'm convinced. Perhaps Bo can explain this if he agrees. In
the meantime, one might be tempted to add meta to Pirsig's Quality to
distinguish it from SOM quality.
I'm sure there's a connection between (scientific) physics and
experience (Quality), but darned if I have a clue as to how to connect
them other than what is obvious. Please keep us informed of any
breakthroughs you have or see looming on the horizon.
Platt
> Hi Platt,
> Thanks for the encouragement.
> I enjoy your posts also.
>
> I rather like your use of the prefix meta in these posts, as i have often
> felt DQ is meta-everything!
> If physics is everything in nature, then metaphysics explores the origins
of
> nature; which is exactly what Aristotle's posthumous compiler could see in
> the writings.
> Just now i am fishing for some ideas on meta-physics (as in science); that
is
> to say Quality physics.
> It's doing my head in, and when that happens i just drop it until i feel
> another bite on the line.
> Strangely, my thoughts keep drifting back to the question of whether
quality
> can be taught; and the proof that it can be taught is a link between
physics
> and Quality.
> Still thinking about this one!
>
> It is so good to know there are those like you out there with an
> understanding soul.
>
> All the best,
> Squonk. :-)
>>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:28 BST