reluctant to let SOM go?
the answer, i believe, is that SOM is so entrenched in our collective
psyche that it is very difficult to conceive of it being superceded. if
this
supercession were not difficult then pirsig needn't have spent decades
thinking through the problem. pirsig is not the first philosopher to
recognise the subject/object schism...indeed this profound dilemma has
been
haunting philosophy for centuries. to move beyond SOM requires radical
surgery.
the intellectual cannot be solely SOM: the MOQ is an idea and it is not
SOM.
to let go of SOM is to let go of the idea of dualism, of solipsism, of
the
possibility of pure objectivity. instead the subjective becomes
partnered
with the intersubjective (to follow husserl and merleau-ponty). the
intersubjective world - the previously 'objective' world - is the world
of
phenomenal consensus.
with the copernican re-ordering of the universe a schism was created:
the
everyday world of our perceptions was usurped by the idea of the 'real'
order of a heliocentric universe. the locus is not with our own
body-subject
and its being-in-the-world, but with an abstract point of reference.
this
abstract realm is only accessible by the intellect. in other words
reason
becomes the sole method of recognising truth - plato's world of forms,
christian heaven, and the pre-eminence of (SOM) intellect all
presuppose
and
perpetuate this abstract-phenomenal dichotomy with precedence given to
the
abstract. in other words the abstract becomes real and the phenomenal
becomes epiphenomenal: this is baudrillard's 'simulacrum' or the
spectacular
reality of the situationists. SOM is part of this worldview and it
can't
be
separated from it. to try and hang on to SOM is to miss the point of
pirsig's work.
the copernican revolution enthroned the sun as the centre of things;
this
is a paternal standpoint. the earth is the goddess, the sun is god and
the
human is supposed to be the dynamic union of the two. since copernicus
the
earth has become merely an object and only god - the male aspect of
divinity
- is recognised.
we perceive from earth. our experiential locus is the body-subject -
this
is the experiential centre of the universe (god is an intelligible
sphere
whose centre is everywhere and circumference nowhere - cusa). only from
this
point of view can we esemplastically reconcile the realms of heaven and
earth into a dynamic unity.
if we need more proof of the need for SOM to be superceded we need only
look to phenomenology and existentialism. the psychopathological
effects
of
SOM were recognised and predicted by husserl and others (most famously
dostoevsky). SOM is the 'disensoulment' of the earth - of ourselves. it
is
the mechanisation of life and human and it is this that is the meaning
of
the robot/AI myths - NOT the production of truly intelligent autonomous
mechanical beings, but the production of mechanical beings from truly
intelligent autonomous ones!!!!!!!!
so i entreat one and all to stay true to the core of pirsig's work. if
you
think SOM is okay then you are very sorely mistaken and you should
probably
go back and read bob's books again...slowly.
Find a better answer, faster with the new Yahoo!7 Search.
