>>>>> And that is exactly what you keep on doing. Nothing 'impasse'. You, Marsha lack a basic understanding of Pirsig's reasoning as to why, in building, in formulating his metaphysics, he took so much care and agonised over the first division. And it had to be DQ/sq.
>>>> "... a 'Metaphysics of Quality' is essentially a contradiction in terms, a logical absurdity.
>>>> "'Ahh, do it anyway. It's interesting.' This was the intellectual part that didn't like undefined things, and telling it not to define Quality was like telling a fat man to stay out of the refrigerator, or an alcoholic to stay out of bars. To the intellect the process of defining Quality has a compulsive quality of its own. It produces a certain excitement ..."
>>>> (RMP, 'LILA')
>>>> But I want to believe that he also wanted to inspire each of us our own enlightened insight.
>>> Jeez Marsha...again...agreement! But, eventhough I do not know what you understand by saying 'enlightened insight' I'll fill it in as far as my understanding goes and that is that part of this 'insight' is the wisdom to distinguish between DQ and sq.
>> Start a discussion on the wisdom to distinguish between DQ and sq if you'd like.
> 'Start a discussion on the wisdom to distinguish between DQ and sq if you'd like'.
> Not only does Marsha hereby plainly shows that she has absolutely no idea about the difference between DQ and sq. No, in fact, she denies the distinction... resulting in the mess of having no idea what we are doing here on the Pirsig MOQ discuss in the first place! Oh dear.
Oh sorry, Andre, I thought you wanted to discuss the wisdom that you received from distinguishing between DQ and sq. Go ahead and explain your understanding. I am sure what you think is very interesting.