dmb said:
Given that this is supposed to be a place to discuss metaphysics, to debate 
philosophical issues, all this other stuff seems like a distraction. To be 
honest, I don't really care if that makes me seem unfriendly. The only that 
matters to me here, is WHAT you say, not how you say it or what a nice guy you 
are. For all I know, you could be posting from a psych hospital, a prison or a 
circus.

Dan:

I thought this discussion group was centered around Robert Pirsig's books, LILA 
and ZMM. Sure, there's philosophy there. But there's a lot more besides. 
There's a story. To neglect the story is to miss half the point.

dmb says:

I agree. The narrative aspect of Pirsig's books certainly wouldn't count as a 
distraction. The relevance of each contribution is open to debate of course, 
but distracting "stuff" I had in mind was, for example, the story about 
domestic disputes while almost getting lost on the highway. The other problem 
is focusing too much on style of the posts or the personality of the poster 
rather than the content of the post. Basically, my complaint is about 
irrelevance, which is not a word I'd apply to any part of Pirsig's books. 

Dan also said:

In fact, over the years as I gone along my merry way I've come to see the story 
as the important part of the equation. A writer can build metaphysical and 
philosophical underpinnings into a story on many levels. Whether a reader is 
capable of understanding the depths of those levels is problematical though.


dmb says:

I agree. It would be nice if we had a few novelists, literary critics, or even 
just a few english majors. The section in ZAMM where Chris and is "father" are 
climbing a mountain together always comes to mind here because the parallels 
between the hiking and the philosophizing are so striking. Just before they 
would have reached the top the narrator gets spooked by the sounds of small 
landslides and decides to turn back and head down toward the valley again. 
Philosophically, he does the same thing. Coward! No wonder Chris wants his real 
dad back.  



Dan said:

Consider for a moment that "all this other stuff" might just be inconsequential 
Dynamic Quality. It is like that. It flutters around the edges, a moth 
distracting from the beguiling light of knowledge being thrown into the world 
by real discussions centering on philosophy.



dmb says:

Not sure what you mean here but it's clear you've raised the issue of how and 
where DQ is likely to play a role in a situation like this one. For those 
who've read his books, the most obvious illustration would be motorcycle 
maintenance. (I'm trying to win a place on the cover of next month's edition of 
"Obvious Magazine". They're doing a small piece about my academic article in 
the spring edition of the journal "Duh!".) 

There is quite a lot packed into that analogy but I'm thinking in particular 
about the demands of the bike. There are thousands of precise parts to it and 
they all have to work in harmony smoothly if you want to take her down the 
road. Getting to know the bike means prolonged and careful engagement, means 
gaining enough experience to get a feel for the materials and the tools and 
bringing that to bear in an active, intelligent engagement with those precision 
parts as a whole system of relations. In this case, the bike is an analogy for 
the MOQ as a metaphysical system. In both cases, I think DQ comes out of that 
kind of focus, that kind of caring. Thus my complaints about distractions. In 
this analogy, irrelevance is one of the gumption traps. You know, you're trying 
to weld a chain guard and he's trying to hand you an ice cream cone. 
It's probably a fitting time to mention the importance of being stuck. The 
other day I stumbled on some brain research that lends support to Pirsig's 
ideas in this area. (Baston, Schoenrade and Ventis. 1993) They compare 
religious experience to creative problem solving. Apparently, in both cases 
people get stuck. In both cases, the person faces a problem that cannot be 
solved from within their present conceptual structure. The left hemisphere, 
with all it's discrete concepts, definitions and understandings, just doesn't 
have what it takes to see any solution. This is a painful situation but it is a 
crucial to the growth process. Anyway, these researchers think that what 
happens in such a crisis is the brain switches from left to right hemisphere 
dominance so that the person gets a non-verbal insight that is beyond the 
persons conceptual structures. Even more astonishing, this insight can not only 
solve the problem at hand it can also alter and expand the person's whole concep
 tual structure. 

I think that's one of the ways we can take the idea that the real bike you're 
working on is yourself.


Thanks,
dmb 




                                          
_________________________________________________________________
Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469229/direct/01/
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/md/archives.html

Reply via email to