From: Ant McWatt (antmcwatt@hotmail.co.uk)
Date: Thu Sep 22 2005 - 15:37:21 BST
Ant McWatt stated September 20th:
>Ifve never seen Pirsigfs comments in gLilafs Childh as any more than a
>further explanation of some of the ideas put forward in LILA and in
>fact these comments corrected some of the more misleading ideas that
>people were propounding (on this Board) around 2000. One of these
>ideas was SOL which I've still never seen explained clearly.
Bo Skutvik replied September 21st:
Not explained clearly? You mean that it is not implied in Pirsig's work?
Ant McWatt comments:
Bo,
What I mean is that Ifve never read an explanation of SOLAQI (SOM as the
MOQ's intellect) from yourself (or anyone else) in which Ifve been able to
follow a well set out argument.
To cut to the chase, if SOM was the intellectual level of the MOQ then that
would mean the MOQ itself is part of SOM or that the MOQ is a
non-intellectual static pattern (such as a social one). Both options seem
nonsensical to me.
Maybe an idea for a future gMOQ through the Looking-glassh? :-)
Best wishes,
Anthony.
gWell! Ifve often seen an SOM without an MOQ,h thought Alice; gbut an
MOQ in an SOM! Itfs the most curious thing I ever saw in all my life!h
(Apologies to Lewis Carroll and the Cheshire Cat). :-)
.
_________________________________________________________________
Be the first to hear what's new at MSN - sign up to our free newsletters!
http://www.msn.co.uk/newsletters
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 : Thu Sep 22 2005 - 15:56:21 BST