Ian said to Dave:
- be interesting if you could unpick that distinction between uniting and 
equalizing those three domains?

dmb says:

As far as equalization goes (making art and science equal by shooting them both 
in the head), the specific example of postmodern relativism I would point to is 
Rorty's "Texts and Lumps". Or is it "Lumps and Texts"? There, he says poets 
shouldn't even try to be like physicists. If anything, it's the other way 
around because truth is just a matter of getting your peers to agree. Rorty's 
notion of intersubjective agreement more or less says that the truth is 
determined by a consensus of the experts, which I would characterize as a kind 
of educated, pro-status quo relativism. But in the MOQ art and science are 
united by way of Quality, the primary empirical reality. In the MOQ, there is a 
kind of empirical realism that keeps us honest and it's nature that tells us 
when our ideas are no good, not experts. In the MOQ, the intersubjective 
agreement that Rorty places at the center of things is based on Quality. There 
is a key passage in chapter 25 of ZAMM about this unification of art and 
science through Quality.

"Phædrus felt that at the moment of pure Quality perception, or not even 
perception, at the moment of pure Quality, there is no subject and there is no 
object. There is only a sense of Quality that produces a later awareness of 
subjects and objects. At the moment of pure quality, subject and object are 
identical. This is the tat tvam asi truth of the Upanishads, but it's also 
reflected in modern street argot. "Getting with it," "digging it," "grooving on 
it" are all slang reflections of this identity. It is this identity that is the 
basis of craftsmanship in all the technical arts. And it is this identity that 
modern, dualistically conceived technology lacks. The creator of it feels no 
particular sense of identity with it. The owner of it feels no particular sense 
of identity with it. The user of it feels no particular sense of identity with 
it. Hence, by Phædrus' definition, it has no Quality.
That wall in Korea that Phædrus saw was an act of technology. It was beautiful, 
but not because of any masterful intellectual planning or any scientific 
supervision of the job, or any added expenditures to "stylize" it. It was 
beautiful because the people who worked on it had a way of looking at things 
that made them do it right unselfconsciously. They didn't separate themselves 
from the work in such a way as to do it wrong. There is the center of the whole 
solution.
The way to solve the conflict between human values and technological needs is 
not to run away from technology. That's impossible. The way to resolve the 
conflict is to break down the barriers of dualistic thought that prevent a real 
understanding of what technology is ... not an exploitation of nature, but a 
fusion of nature and the human spirit into a new kind of creation that 
transcends both. When this transcendence occurs in such events as the first 
airplane flight across the ocean or the first footstep on the moon, a kind of 
public recognition of the transcendent nature of technology occurs. But this 
transcendence should also occur at the individual level, on a personal basis, 
in one's own life, in a less dramatic way.
The walls of the canyon here are completely vertical now. In many places room 
for the road had to be blasted out of it. No alternate routes here. Just 
whichever way the river goes. It may be just my imagination, but it seems the 
river's already smaller than it was an hour ago.
Such personal transcendence of conflicts with technology doesn't have to 
involve motorcycles, of course. It can be at a level as simple as sharpening a 
kitchen knife or sewing a dress or mending a broken chair. The underlying 
problems are the same. In each case there's a beautiful way of doing it and an 
ugly way of doing it, and in arriving at the high-quality, beautiful way of 
doing it, both an ability to see what "looks good" and an ability to understand 
the underlying methods to arrive at that "good" are needed. Both classic and 
romantic understandings of Quality must be combined."
...
"The answer is Phaedrus' contention that classic understanding should not be 
OVERLAID with romantic prettiness: classic and romantic understanding should be 
united at a basic level. In the past our common universe of reason has been in 
the process of escaping, rejecting the romantic, irrational world of 
prehistoric man. It's been necessary since before the time of Socrates to 
reject the passions, the emotions, in order to free the rational mind for an 
understanding of nature's order which was as yet unknown. Now it's time to 
further an understanding of nature's order by reassimilating those passions 
which were originally fled from. The passions, the emotions, the affective 
domain of man's consciousness are a part of nature's order too. The central 
part. 
At present we're snowed under with an irrational expansion of blind 
dat-gathering in the sciences because there's no rational format for an 
understanding of scientific creativity. At present we are also snowed under 
with a lot of stylishness in the arts - thin art - because there's very little 
assimilation or extension into underlying form. We have artists with no 
scientific knowledge and scientists with no artistic knowledge and both with no 
spiritual sense of gravity at all, and the result is not just bad, it is 
ghastly. The time for a real unification of art and technology is really long 
overdue." (p. 294)

..."Peace of mind isn't as all superficial to technical work. It's the whole 
thing. ...The reason for this is that peace of mind is a prerequisite for a 
perception of that Quality which is beyond romantic Quality and classic Quality 
and which unites the two, and which must accompany the work as it proceeds. The 
way to see what looks good and understand the reasons it looks good, and TO BE 
AT ONE WITH THIS GOODNESS as the work proceeds, is to cultivate an inner 
quietness, a peace of mind so that goodness can shine through."

Emphasis is Pirsig's in the original.






_________________________________________________________________
Get your vacation photos on your phone!
http://windowsliveformobile.com/en-us/photos/default.aspx?&OCID=0809TL-HM
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/

Reply via email to