it was april fool's day, and while I was not born on that day, it was close enough to once a year consider myself a fool and consider the implication of my foolishness
On Apr 3, 2010, at 6:47 PM, John Carl wrote: > "A crucial feature of Royce's doctrine of interpretation was to develop a > cooperative form of mediation between what he called dyadic dangerous > pairs. In War and Insurance where this idea is developed extensively, > Royce, in a seeming reconciliation of a Hobbesian view of aggressive man and > a human view of a natural human sympathy, declares that "By nature, man both > loves and hates his neighbor." > > Human individuals, says Royce, both nourish and inflame each other; one > cannot do without the other; but when together there is often a quarrel, for > each has a different quest or interest. > > Royce writes "the dyadic, the dual, the bilateral relations of man and man, > of each man to his neighbor, are relations fraught with social danger. A > pair of men is what I call a dangerous community." > > Indeed, in line with family process therapy, Royce notes that "when mutual > friction once arises between a pair of lovers or of rivals or of individuals > otherwise interestingly related.. the friction tends to increase, unless > some other relation intervenes..." > > The resolution of the tension depends, for Royce, on establishing a new and > creative social tie between them, an enrichment of the community beyond the > two. What is needed, is an interpreter B, whose task is to interpret A's > interests to C and B's interest to A, therby creating, making conscious, and > carrying out a common or united will. If successful, C will create, > sustain, and increase harmony between A and B. > > The interpreter, says Royce, has the function "to transform the essentially > dangerous pair into the consciously and consistently harmonious triad. > Royce calls the interpreter, the "Spirit of the Community". > > Dr. Jackie, > > Genuine Individuals and Genuine Communities: Toward a Roycean Public Policy > > > Don't you think the role of the Zuni Shaman to his people fit this role of > interpreter? Interpreting the white man's world to his people? > > At the same time, the white man's world interpreted a new meaning to the > tribal elders regarding this one persecuted individual - that it ain't might > that makes right. Or if it is, we're mightier than you and we say he > doesn't deserve to be hung for arguing with tradition. > > And finally, the Zuni interprets his culture to the white man's world, > learning and teaching songs and histories handed down for generations and in > danger of being otherwise lost. The triad comes full circle. > > When Steve Marquis plead as his reason for joining MD, his conflict with me, > he was seeking an interpreter. I think I understood that intuitively then, > but I didn't have this nifty intellectual underpinning to the process in > place, that Royce has given me lately. And thus a whole new way of > analyzing patterns occurs now that I had no way of seeing then. > > This led me to two realizations this week, about the old conflict. > > How best to describe that conflict is in relating it to what we already know > and agree upon. Namely, that when Rigel, definitely one of "those people" > who never quite got ZAMM, asks the captain, Do you think Lila Blewitt has > Quality? And the captain says "yes", in an automatic and intuitive way. By > Royce's analysis, he acts as an interpreter between that dangerous dyadic > pair, Rigel and Lila, who have followed their static patterns to the > inevitable conflictual place that pairs always come to. > > > This is one realization I made just this week, that takes the sting out of a > similar question about my Quality that arose, where Steve said I didn't have > any. More specifically, he stated the reason that he didn't care to > socialize with me as much as I wanted to socialize with him, was because I > was a low-Quality person. > > That really stung. I mean if Steve had been just a Rigel, who really didn't > understand the MoQ, it'd be easy to diss his dismissal of moi. > > . But Steve and I had been friends for more than thirty years, and the last > twenty of those years much centered upon RMP's writings and the question of > Quality in general. His was certainly and informed opinion. > > If anybody's was. > > It took me quite aback when he levied it at me with such force and > certainty. Like he had authoritative backup for the assertion. Something > that seemed to him, empirically verifiable. > > It made me really mad. > > For one thing, I thought that of all people, Steve ought to have a higher > opinion of me than would be met by a quick judgement of outward appearance. > He was pointing to my outward appearance as the obviation of my "romantic > quality". That is, in the world of surface appearances, I'm the beer can > shim in the handlebars of life. > > We both knew that. But what changed suddenly, was his viewing of my > classical aspect. My intellectual Quality. There we had a sudden and > vicious conflict that I never suspected or saw coming. It was only this > week in re-thinking these old issues, that I realized an assumption I'd been > making that was completely unwarranted on my part. And in retrospect, was a > very foolish assumption as well. > > I figured Steve had ample empirical evidence for my intellectual Quality, > even if I was a social zero. After all, he'd known me since I was 14 years > old. Longer than any other person in my life except for my family of > brother, cousins and parents. And closer than them because they'd live all > over and in various separations, but Steve and I were always close. > > Close in proximity, but not emotionally. Steve was always part of my life, > but we were never really close. I don't even know his birthdate, or what > time of year it comes. Asking favors of Steve is always extremely awkward, > because he hates so much to be imposed upon that I feel bad in asking just > in seeing his face fall. > > I used to visit him about four times a year when he lived in Sacramento with > his cat, working for McClellan on the F-111. I think I was, if not his only > visitor, I was his most regular. He had a great collection of Sci Fi books, > a genre we both loved. In hardcover and alphabetized on his shelves. I'd > loved to have borrowed them and read them, but I remember the pain that came > over his face when I'd hinted at such, at removing from his shelves a member > of his collection, his family. > > His cat just hid under the bed till I left. > > When his dad died, and he moved onto the old family place on Sweetland road, > where he'd been born, with his new russian bride and new daughter, Lu and I > were about the only options socially for an extremely introverted > misanthrope and his non-english speaking wife, and thus the de facto society > that every family needs. And I'd been arguing for philosophically for > years with Steve. > > I figured if nothing else, this was a pragmatic demonstration of the truth > of my assertion against rugged individualism. Oxsana came from a socialist > nation. She couldn't comprehend the non-social nature of Steve's > existence. His only surviving relatives were a 90 year old uncle and aunt. > > > If nothing else, Steve would be crazy to cut off my eager offerings of > social intercourse because it would make his wife very unappy. But I think > that really doesn't solve the true problem in a life-long argument with a > friend, that sometimes winning the argument means losing the friendship. It > becomes an unequal proposition when one side wins. > > That's what Royce helped me to intellectualize with his ""when mutual > friction once arises between a pair of lovers or of rivals or of individuals > otherwise interestingly related.. the friction tends to increase, unless > some other relation intervenes..." > > And that is why reading Steve's plea in the MD archives for intervention, > gives me a frission of new revelation. > > Or as a famous person once said. "a realization is the most important thing > you will ever make. > > > The second revelation this week, regarding Steve's misunderstanding of me, > even though he knew me, he didn't really know me. Needs much, much more > explanation. > > Almost enough for me to stop and say, "hey. Why burdeneth thou the MD, when > the MD never offered to cure your personal problems guy.?" > > Because that is also part of the story. I did ask the MD for help. I did > then, and I do now. Even as Steve begs for an interpreter. He wanted to > know, "Is not the static reliance upon DQ itself a trap?" He was talking > about me. He was asking a legitimate question to which judgement is still > pending. > > We could defer it to another day. But I"m feeling like addressing it now. > > Due to that second realization and all. > > > The second realization, that Steve didn't know me as well as he thought he > did centers around a couple of small pieces of experience I had that I never > really described or explained to anybody in the whole world, except for Lu. > And even she doesn't quite get the entire context, in many ways. She was > never a student of George Sessions, for one thing. > > George was one strong influence that Steve and I had in common. He mentions > him in his posting to MD as, one of those "some teachers should be > cloned". Steve went through Sierra College ahead of me and when I wasn't > much part of his life at the time because I was down south framing houses in > Visalia, newly married to my high school sweet heart and only girlfriend so > far. But later, I moved back up to Grass Valley and went to Sierra in > Rocklin myself. And took Logic from Sessions. > > I've mentioned George before on this list. He co authored the book on Deep > Ecology. His master thesis was a refutation of the environmental movement > as anthropocentric. He was also a good friend of Gary Snyder, naturally, > living up the hill from Sierra. George had a big influence on a lot of > people. Some couldn't stand him, but those who "got him" loved him with a > big and unforgettable love. > > If I need say anymore to commend him to this group, let me just say that it > was George who introduced Steve and me both to ZAMM and the philosophy of > RMP. This was in pre-Lila days, so I never found out what Sessions would > have made of the MoQ. He was a Spinozaist himself. Pantheist, if anything. > But make no doubt: a teacher of Quality. > > And he really liked me. > > But I didn't really know how to explain this to Steve. I felt it was an > important point in my defense, if my intellect was being attacked, that this > one teacher we both respected, respected me. Part of the problem is that > I'm sort of weird in those situations where I get a lot of (what I feel is) > undeserved affirmation. With Sessions, it happened twice. > > Besides Logic, he taught a very interesting course called "Rationality, > Mysticism and the Environment." At the beginning of the course he'd explain > that most of the people in the class would quickly drop out, because this > was a very intensive course, with a lot of reading and a virtually > graduate-level intensity required. He recommended to me the course because > he'd enjoyed my participation in his logic class, and thought I'd benefit > from it. > > He was right. I went into that course as an agnostic future attorney, and > came out a carpenter deep ecologist, so you could definitely say it changed > my life. > > There we other people in the class who were also bright and knowledgeable. > More so than me. I came pretty much with a beginner's mind, a > fundamentalist background and a very conservative republican, > anti-environmentalist dad. But one thing that stopped me short, was a > little speech George gave one day about the relative intellectual merits of > individuals as a causative in society and told the class that as far as he > was concerned, John was probably smarter than himself in these matters. > > It got quiet and my face burned and I didn't know what to say. I mean, what > would you say? Splutter and object? I couldn't. There was a certain sense > in what he was saying that I knew was true. I didn't know how to explain > it, but ideas had been pouring through me and into me and out of me that I > couldn't glibly dismiss. > > But I couldn't really stand up and crow either because it seemed weird even > to me. And besides, who was George comparing me too? Not exactly the creme > de la creme of the intellectual crop. I was in jr college fer chrissake. > > But still. It weighed with me when Steve and I had philosophical > discussion. Sure, I ain't a genius. But I ain't chopped liver neither. > > I even tested George's opinion of me somewhat. After my divorce, I went > back to Sierra, and got involved along a whole new lilne of social > development. That was when I met Bill, grandson of Neal, and the > InterVarsity episode which landed me Lu. But I dipped my toes in the > philosophical waters again. Those days I was mainly involved with college > for the free showers in the gym and the library open till 10:00. I was > living in the back of my truck, beside a stream and about as close to > homeless as a guy can get. I took Intro to Philosophy just to see if George > remembered me and on the first day of class, talking about the potential for > Philsophy to change the world he pointed at me as one of the most brilliant > minds he'd encountered. > > Naturally I dropped the class and never talked to George again. > > I mean, who could possibly live up to that kind of billing and expectation? > My brain seized and my heart pounded and I got out of there as fast as I > could. > > But years later when my friend Steve is accusing me of low-Quality, I'm > thinking back to that experience... And I get all huffy to myself thinking I > shouldn't have to remind Steve of this. > > But just this week, I realize... wait a minute. Did I ever tell him that > story? I don't think I did. On one hand, how embarrassing, on the other, > what a cool guy I am to not go all braggin' on myself like some people do. > > > > Fools will want unwarranted status, > Deference from fellow monks, > Authority in the monasteries, > And homage from good families. > "Let both householders and renunciants > Believe that I did this. > Let them obey me in eerie task!" > Such are the thoughts of a fool > Who cultivates desire and pride. > > The way to material gain is one thing, > The path to Nirvana another. > Knowing this, a monk who is the Buddha's disciple > Should not delight in being venerated, > But cultivate solitude instead. > > > The Dhammapada: A New Translation of the Buddhist Classic with Annotations > by Gil Fronsdal as recently posted by Marsha the beloved. > > > Part of this revelation of mine involved an even earlier frustration with > Steve, when my first wife Deanna and he had conversed about me, and my > character, and they both concurred that I thought I was smarter than others, > which was annoying to them both. She told me this later in a way of rubbing > my nose int he poor opinion of myself in the eyes of my friends. > > It hurt, at the time. I admit. And part of that same old hurt was an idea > in my mind that "why doesn't Steve understand that my opinion of my own > intellect isn't completely unfounded? That there's some evidence for this?" > > But along with my realization of his ignorance of George's opinion of me > this week, I also realized I'd made a hugely unwarranted assumption that > time as well. This involving our common boarding school experience. > > Steve was a couple of years ahead of me. A Junior my Freshman year, and > Senior and friend to me my Sophmore. A visitor and rescuer from doldrums in > my jr and sr. years, coming to visit in his dodge 440 charger with the > quadrophonic 8 track blasting black sabbath. > > I was at that school mainly because of a friendship with a guy who was the > star of the place - Johnny Eggers. His mom was the school registrar, his > dad the jobs coordinater and construction teacher I worked for. I'd known > Johnny when we both went to VHM in Santa Cruz, an SDA parochial school, > grades 1-10 where we'd been in eighth grade together and became good > friends, even though he was perfect in every way and I was not. > > He's a Dr, today, btw. Predicatably. He got nothing but A's his whole life > except for a C in English by a teacher who was notorious for giving nothing > but. Really pissed him off. > > Everybody in the whole school and world knew that Johnny Eggers was smart. > Our school had this ceremony where he was up in front of the school, getting > an award for getting the highest scores on his college boards, but > unbeknownst to any, I'd actually scored higher. > > His mom explained it to me, since I'd qualified for a National Merit > Scholarship, she'd assumed I'd fill out the necessary paperwork and send it > in and I'd get the scholarship and they'd have a ceremony then. > > She assumed wrongly. But in a way it was embarrassing for her. It appeared > to an objective observer that she'd slighted the one who beat her son in the > great game of intellectual measurement. > > Furthurmore, in a visit to her in the year following my graduation, she > assured me that I'd gotten the highest SAT's in her ten years of being the > school registrar. Steve was included in her reign, so being of the extremely > intelligent person I am, I was able to reason that I'd beat his objective > intellectual measurement so his disparagement of my intellect was completely > unfounded. > > I didn't say this, at the time. Or ever, for that matter. Till now, that > is. But it wrankled a bit. > > Till this week when I realized Steve didn't know that stuff. Even though > we'd been friends a long time, most of our relationship had centered around > him, and his problems, his issues. I knew him pretty well. He didn't know > me at all. > > I needed an interpreter. > > Steve needed an interpreter. > > We both looked to MD. > > He got his answer then. He really respected the thinking on this forum. > The high quality intellection impressed his socially-starved soul. He said > he could barely keep up with the intellectual quality he found on this > list. Why he understood, that Robert Pirsig HIMSELF sometimes communicated > with members of this list, affirming what they thought. > > > So therefore, in a conflictual situation like he had, it was natural to > appeal to authority. It would be natural to pay attention to the designated > authority had to say about his problems. > > I wonder what that was? I wonder what response he got? > 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 ___ 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
