From: abahn@comcast.net
Date: Thu Sep 25 2003 - 06:05:13 BST
Hi Mark,
You lost me a bit on the Jane Ayer and Mr. Rochester affair. But I don't agree
that a primary Pirsig is largely obscured by secondary interpretations.
Because, after Pirsig, we are ALL doing secondary interpretations. Some of
these secondary interpretations may obscure the primary Pirsig and some may add
to the primary Pirsig. And some may shed new light on the primary Pirsig.
You said: "The MoQ position, 'as is' does have a formal structure. At least,
this seems clear to me."
Andy: It has a formal structure that is open to some criticisms. The debates
we often find here are on this formal structure and the strengths and weaknesses
of it.
You also said: "The position is one of SQ-SQ harmony, and DQ-SQ tension.
Bo's terminology does not, and should not have to be reiterated every time he
discusses his ideas - i certainly agree with you there. However, it is a matter
of record that Bo feels his view to be, 'the proper MoQ,' and this IS confusing
for those new to the forum."
Andy: I do not intend any disrespect, but your assertion that the MOQ position
is one of SQ-SQ harmony and DQ-SQ tension is not only vague, but also confusing.
It says nothing about the levels that Pirsig also delineates and specifically
does not help us distinguish the intellectual and social levels which has been
the focus of much debate. Now I don't know anything about the matter of record,
but it certainly appears you have very strong opinions about "the proper MOQ"
and BO misrepresents whatever this may be. It is my opinion that the proper MOQ
does not exist and this is something both Bo and you moght disagree with me on.
Cheers,
Andy
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 25 2003 - 06:06:35 BST