Declan, This is the topic of of discussion here, while the arguements rage using differing terms their meaning revolves around the issue you bring up. Some tend toward the rational,others to the empirical. Tough and tender minded as James explained. The mediation of both is exactly the explaination Pirsig wishes to explore. In this, there is no correct view other than the one you develop regarding your own expereince. Quality is expereince, everything is composed of expereince, taking this concept any further in terms causalality has detoured many a fine thinker since Heraticlus.
The problem, as I understand it, is that we, as a people are conditioned to expect final answers when the fact is it's a running explaination that fluctuates with expereince. Because we are a classically dominated culture we tend to want to understand and conceptualize using classical methods. This bias runs just as strong through both romantic and classic views. One should not lose sight of the fact that the most valuable concept Pirsig emits with MoQ is the development of ones own personal metaphysic. nice of you to contribute -Ron ________________________________ From: Declan Moran <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 4:13:06 AM Subject: [MD] Romantic/Classic knowledge vs quality Hello In Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, Pirsig spends a lot of time discussing romantic and classic knowledge/intelligence. Im not sure how Id summarize his main message on them though: that both are equally good, and when one (or peoples) neglects one and emphasises the other too much, its a bad thing. One should pursue both (equally). What was it that the people in the traffic jam (with the empty expressions) were lacking: not enough romantic knowledge, and too much classic? Am I missing something? Im even more uncertain how he relates Romantic/Classic knowledge to the idea of "quality" that he develops. Is he saying that romantic intelligence/knowledge is that which first recognises quality (or was that some other "sense"). And somewhat later the classic knowledge can be used to develop/apply this quality? If I recall correctly, in the railroad analogy, the railway tracks were quality, the cutting edge of the train was romantic knowledge (?) and the rest of the train was classic knowledge? Id be very grateful for any clarifications. Best Wishes, Declan 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/ 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/
