Dear Thomas,
You asked 31/8 16:47 +0200 why Pirsig solves the question whether quality is
objective of subjective by seeing Quality as more fundamental than objects
and subjects rather than saying that Quality emerges from the interaction of
objects and subjects.
Did you read in 'Lila' (ch. 7) Pirsig's claim that 'Subject-object
metaphysics is characterized by herds of huge, dominating, monster
platypi.', and his list of platypi and MoQ-solutions for them?
I don't think that these solutions are possible when you say that Quality
emerges from interaction of objects and subjects. Do you?
You will always be left with the question HOW Quality emerges from
(supposedly indepently existing) objects and subjects, whether Quality
becomes more or less if this or that changes 'objectively' or 'subjectively'
and ... to what extent it is 'objective' (dependent on characteristics of
the objects interacting) and to what extent it is 'subjective' (dependent on
characteristics of the subjects interacting). Likewise the other platypi
will remain unsolved. Or can you present other solutions for them?
Met vriendelijke groet (goed om hier weer een Nederlander tegen te komen!),
Wim
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 : Fri Oct 25 2002 - 16:06:24 BST