Bo
> I guess you will call it "foul play", but I feel that Pirsig had to revert to the
> proto-moq of ZAMM (the trinity version) to be able to communicate
> with an audience that had never heard about LILA and the MOQ proper and whose
> out- look was solidly SOM-steeped. You will notice that this quote.
No "foul play", I anticipated this response. But Lila was out for over a
year before this conference and it was my understanding that he was
invited because at least some people were interest in his work (agreedly
ZMM because given the time it takes to set up these conferences the
invite probably came before Lila's publication). I find it hard to
believe that at least some of "those people" would not at least have
glanced at Lila in that year. I also find it hard to believe that he
would not present an MoQ version that he no longer thought of as
correct, or the best.
Assuming a hostile or bored audience, Why go? And If you go, why hold
back?
> Objects in the dynamic sense!?
Yep "unmeasured phenomenal objects" all of which consist of two dynamic
qualities "being" and "wanting" (not want-ta-being, that is a much later
phenomena ;-) Or persistance and intellegence. Or matter and mind. The
quality to exist and the quality to make choices co-mingle to make
"unmeasured phenomenal objects" or Dynamic Quality. That's the stuff
that goes in the front of Bohr's machines. Reductionist, yep.
Materialist, sort of, except the materials are values.
> Have I alienated you again?
Again, I don't recall the first time. Oh, you mean SOLAQI ? Given my
doggedness on the subject I think the reverse should be true. At least I
understand it better even though I'm unconvinced of it's utility.
Dave
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 - 16:01:57 BST