From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sat Jul 26 2003 - 22:30:27 BST
Rick, Jon and all:
Rick said:
I agree that DQ is always left out. But no *static* patterns should be
excluded.
JONATHAN retorts:
As I see it, there are an infinity of potential SQ patterns which may be
left out. One can never be sure of encompassing them all within a
metaphysical hierarchy. David B. may claim that everything fits neatly, but
you show me a classification (e.g. Pirsig's 4 levels), and I'll find you
some platypi.
dmb says:
Actually it was Pirsig who made the claim and I only posted the passage
approvingly. I think the level of certainty and the degree of neatly-ness is
a different issue and a bogus objection, Jon. The point of making the claim,
that everything knowable fits into the four levels of static patterns, is
not to express an egomaniacal amount of confidence in his idea, but is only
a description of its SCOPE. He's not saying that he's perfect. He's not
saying, "I'm great!". He's just saying, "This explanation is broad." He's
just saying that his description of reality is as wide and inclusive as
possbile.
But since you brought it up, lets put that certainty to a test. You asked to
be challenged on this, Jon. I'll bite. Other than the dynamic, what's being
left out of Pirsig's levels? Find us some platypi.
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 : Sat Jul 26 2003 - 22:31:30 BST