>===== Original Message From moq_discuss@moq.org =====
>Hey Erin,
>>
>ERIN:
>> I think that I got a little hung up on this idea of exploring culture
>> viewpoints. But I would like to approach this in another way.
>> Pirsig wanted to show that good was outside of our classifcation system to
>> show that substance was not absolute reality. He did do this and just
>used
>> Indian/Greek as an example. I now think that limiting this insight to
>these
>> two cultures has been what we are getting messed up on.
>> The classification system (you don't need to think it is Greek) that
>Laverne
>> was asking the question was
>> Inanimate--- Animate
>> Animal
>> Dog
>> Cockerspaniel
>>
>>
>> The question what "kind" of dog was supposed to be anwered by going to the
>> lower level. Just as the question what "kind of animal "should" be
>responded
>> with dog.
>>
>> John wooden leg bypassed this classification system by answering good.
>> The only way I would agree that good is in this classification system
>> is if you put it above Inanimate- Animate level.
>> Well lookee here it shows "good is a noun" after all.
>> Quality can not be broken down into good and bad. Those are adjectives.
>> Quality is a noun. It's all Good.
>
>>
>> RICK:
>I think you present what Pirsig was trying to do very well. And I think we
>agree on what that was. I believe we only disagree as to whether his
>example successfully supports his theory and proves what he says it does.
>Indeed, it's all good(n), but it's not all good(adj). Pirsig thinks John
>Wooden Leg was saying the dog was good(n). I find it far, far, more likely
>that John Wooden Leg was saying the dog was good(adj). Damn homonyms!!!
>But that's what makes horseracing, I guess... You decide for yourself.
>
>rick
>
ERIN
Since John used good as an adj I would guess also that he meant good (adj).
But what do you mean that Pirsig was thinking John was saying good(n) when
John wasy saying good (adj)!??????? We don't even know if John existed do we?
What if he was a character Pirsig created. So Pirsig was in the dark about his
own character?
Imagine this situation. John knew Laverne meant "kind" as a noun and was
expecting a noun for an answer and decided to mess with her head and give an
adjective as an answer. Maybe if she asked "is this a good dog?" He would
have told her it was a cockerspaniel.
RICK I believe we only disagree as to whether his
>example successfully supports his theory and proves what he says it does.
ERIN I don't claim he "proves" anything or was trying to "prove" anything
that is your type of goal. Maybe he was trying to show you something. So when
you were looking up good in the dictionary were you 100% sure it was already a
noun? Why did you feel the need to look it up if you know it so well. Or did
Pirsig help you to realize what good was?
No Pirsig did not put good (n) in the dictionary and did not give you a
solution at the end of the story but maybe it was you wanting this and not
him.
So I don't want you to wear an " I love Pirsig" shirt but I would like you to
stop presenting your expectations as "Pirsig's"
So again my guess is John was messing with Laverne by giving her an unexpected
and maybe unwanted answer just like Pirsig was messing with you.
>
>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