>===== Original Message From moq_discuss@moq.org =====
>In a message dated 12/30/01 11:12:36 AM GMT Standard Time,
>beasley@austarnet.com.au writes:
>
I see your point but I don't think "Quality is a noun" improves anything.
"of course the ultimate Quality isn't a noun or an adjective or anything else
definable"
Pirsig seems to call good a noun and then in a roundabout way retract that
statement in the last paragraph of Lila. I don't know if this contradiction
is such a weakness, it is just the platypus of substance. I think by saying
"good is a noun" was just a statement that absolute reality consisted of
values not just the conventional sense of substance.
Pirsig's assertion is that Quality is a noun.
>If one views Good as a synonym for Quality then Good is also a noun.
>This is a big 'if' and one must be careful?
>I would stick with Quality is a noun.
>Why?
>Because the monistic DQ is concept free, unpatterned, unconditioned, source.
>One would refer to the source of a river as a place?
>One may describe its journey as good?
>
>Squonk.
>
>P.S. Hatchet job?
>My dear John!
>
>
>
>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
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 - 16:01:43 BST