From: Elizaphanian (Elizaphanian@members.v21.co.uk)
Date: Mon Oct 21 2002 - 10:21:51 BST
Hi David,
You wrote: "The word Pirsig chose for the 4th level is "intellectual" and
calling it anything else will only cause confusion among the participants
and disortion of the MOQ."
Clearly I disagree with Pirsig's nomenclature in this respect (subject to
where I get to with my response to Scott R's question). That disagreement is
based, however, on a profound agreement with, using your words, "4L + DQ =
One", ie the MoQ as a whole. What I am trying to do, in my clumsy and inept
fashion no doubt, is make a small incremental advance in our understanding
of the MoQ. I thought that was what we were here for. You disagree - my
proposal would result in 'distortion of the MoQ'.
I have a question for you: where do you draw the line? I make the (possibly
charitable) assumption that you don't see Pirsig as inerrant or infallible;
at what point, then, does disagreement with Pirsig result in 'distortion of
the MoQ'? Even more important, who is to judge?
Sam
www.elizaphanian.v-2-1.net/home.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 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 10:38:00 GMT