Hey,
Are ya'll actually suggesting discussing "Good is a noun." That's great.
I've had a lot of trouble with this supposed one sentance summary of the
MoQ. It's a funny kind of summary because it's essentially meaningless if
you don't know the whole of RMP's theories; and even if you do it's still
pretty damn tricky.
all Good,
Rick
At 09:21 AM 3/4/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Roger wrote . . .
>
>>The quote:
>> >While living,
>> >Be a dead man.
>> >Be completely dead,
>> >And then do as you please.
>> >And all will be well.
>>
>>Is okay, but Pirsig himself explains it rationally on the same page.
>
>That's true, but that particular MOQ translation doesn't move me the way
>the original poetry does, even though I understand it rationally. I guess
>the challenge would be to come up with a rational take on it that also works
>in the affective domain. That's the way both ZAMM and "Lila", taken as a
>whole, work for me -- like, I don't know, prose poetry or something. They
>work in the head and in the gut.
>
>>Another idea...... Jonathan's Q.... "Is a city sentient?"
>>
>>Or Platt's..... "Are subatomic particles aware?"
>>
>>Or what does "Good is a noun" mean?
>>
>>It seems we could "Go both ways" on these as well. Count me in on whatever
>>has value.
>
>All would be worthwhile inquiries.
>
>Jeff Travis
>
>
>
>MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
>Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
>
>
MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:54 BST