Krimel said to dmb: Honestly Dave I have seen no evidence that you have the slightest clue what my worldview is. I notice that you like to label me as this or that, so you can argue with someone else and I am chameleon enough to accept whatever label anyone cares to attach to me, from religious fanatic to besserwisser.
dmb says: Oh please. Obviously, the only "evidence" I have about your views is contained in what you post here. That's all I'm talking about, of course. [Krimel] I see. You understand me the same way you understand James; which is to say not at all. Krimel said: I do take a bit of offense at the outcast thing. dmb says: That's just silly. Nobody said disagreement is off limits or that Pirsig should be treated as an oracle. But, since you repeatedly and consistently advocate the very thing that Pirsig opposes, it is a bit hard to believe he's had much influence on your thinking. It seems to me that you either reject or fail to notice the point of his work. What is it you like about it, exactly? [Krimel] As often as I have said what I don't like about Pirsig I have stated what I do. No need for me to repeat what you don't seem to be able to understand anyway. dmb says: He's misguided about Darwinism and (as you've said elsewhere) misguided about Taoism and yet he has done an excellent job of bringing them together? He keeps the Buddhism on the down low? Yea, he likes to "hide" it in the titles and themes of his books. Dude, you've got to be bullshitting me! You're just making this up as you go along, aren't you. I'd bet that, aside from the quotes posted here, you've never read Pirsig. [Krimel] I applaud Pirsig's use of Darwin in the sense that evolution is as close to a Theory of Everything as we have. It unites the sciences from physics to psychology in ways that nothing else in science or philosophy does. Like Dennett I think it is about the best idea EVER. What is disappointing about Pirsig is to hear him claim that biology is "anti-entropic". This is a notion so out of touch with reality that it is seldom heard outside of fundamentalist circle. His appeal to an Omega Point pulling evolution toward some future state is equally disheartening nonsense. But evolution is all about the way that static patterns form and persist in the face of constantly changing circumstances and in this respect Pirsig does an admirable job of showing how these facets of change and stability have metaphysical significance. Zen is mentioned in the title of his book but not so much in the contents. The thrust of ZMM is Taoism not Buddhism. It is metaphysical not spiritual. But you will read into it whatever you want anyway. With regards to my objections to Pirsig use of Taoism I have said over and over again that I think naming the Tao Quality emphasizes one aspect of the Tao at the expense of others. The problem is not so much with Pirsig who is certainly free to emphasize whatever he likes and really doesn't mess it up all that badly. The problem is that people like you seem unable to see past the specific meanings that Pirsig emphasizes and focus on the term he uses; missing other critical aspects of the Tao itself. As far as Lila is concerned I think it is an extension of Taoism into the realm of the 10,000 things. It is about Yin and Yang, male and female, active and passive, order and chaos, static and dynamic. I think you and others focus on the specifics at the expense of the broader picture that he paints. I actually do make this up as I go along and I find it remarkable that there is any consistency to what I say at all. I am pretty confident that I was reading Pirsig before you were born but clearly we do not read the same Pirsig. Given your exposition of James, I feel pretty good about that. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
