Greetings,
By all means, I agree that all the ideas presented in LILA should be explored thoroughly. That would definitely represent 'Inquiry'. Marsha On Aug 4, 2010, at 7:54 AM, Mary wrote: > Hi Marsha & Dave Thomas by reference, > > If one makes a judgement about him from the position of the >> small self, >> it will be nothing but the reflection of the small self's limited >> perspective. > > I agree that none of us are Jesus Christ. To expect perfection of anyone is > to objectify them. I also agree with Dave Thomas though, too, in his recent > series of posts. There's something rotten in Denmark. Dave pointed to a > number of things, none of which are fatal in and of themselves, and my > concern is probably not either, but the accumulated weight of > inconsistencies in Lila is telling and I, for one, think this is an area > worthy of exploration. > > ZMM speaks with a voice of honesty and authenticity. We will never know if > this is justified, but even if it was made entirely of whole cloth (which I > don't believe it was) the ideas expressed ring true as those of a tormented > individual desperately trying to make sense of the human condition. He > bravely confronts his beasts and I admire his willingness to step up to the > plate and examine his value as a father to Chris. This is important to the > authenticity of the book since it is, after all, about a motorcycle trip > with his son. In contrast, Lila chronicles a boat trip with a woman, but he > never once reveals the true nature of why he is there. The premise is false > and thus calls into question the basis for certain of the insights he > proposes. > > Now you could argue that this is irrelevant, but given that the title itself > is "Lila an Inquiry into _Morals_", I would say that at the very least, he > missed a golden opportunity there. > > Best, > Mary > > > > > > > > >> On Aug 3, 2010, at 9:15 PM, Mary wrote: >> >>> I've been uneasy for many years with "Lila" the book. If you check >> back in >>> the archives you will find where I objected to the sexism in it many >> years >>> ago without even being aware of the truth of it. It wasn't until >> recently I >>> learned that Pirsig was so completely dishonest about it. What an >> ugly >>> secret! Had I known he was a married man having an affair with Lila >> on his >>> journey down the Hudson, that would have put the whole thing in an >> entirely >>> different light for me right from the start. Now I'm not such a >> prude that >>> I can't get past that to see the value in his writings, but when I >> did learn >>> this I must say I was disappointed to see it in a man self-proclaimed >> to be >>> in search of beauty, truth, and Quality. I am a grown up woman and >>> understand entirely the weakness of men (having observed this at >> first hand >>> numerous times - they are but children in the grips of testosterone >> after >>> all, and cannot really help it, but wouldn't it have been much more >>> revelatory for him to be honest about what he was doing? I mean, if >> you are >>> writing a book fraught with psychology and heavy with metaphysical >> meaning, >>> wouldn't you think honesty would be a prime directive? When I first >> learned >>> about his philandering, I was so disappointed I almost chucked the >> whole >>> thing. Then I realized that he already had chucked the whole thing >> in Lila >>> on his own. By this I mean where he disavows his original insights >> into the >>> intellect of Man and in Lila waters the whole thing down to a thesis >>> proposition worthy of a Masters degree. But the original ideas in >> ZMM were >>> worthy. The Intellectual Level as SOM makes perfect sense for me and >> makes >>> even the most egregious BS in Lila palatable - especially now that I >>> understand he was merely justifying his own lack of integrity with >> that >>> book. What a shame really. >>> >>> Mary >>> >>> - The most important thing you will ever make is a realization. >>> >>>> [email protected]] On Behalf Of David Thomas >>>> Sent: Monday, August 02, 2010 5:33 PM >>>> Hi Krimel, >>>>> >>>>> [Krimel] >>>>> Excellent set of posts here, Dave. I have been beating away at most >>>> of this >>>>> for a long time but you have summarized it all very nicely. >>>> Thank you. >>>>> I also agree strongly with what you said about the relationship of >>>> ZMM to >>>>> Lila. ZMM is almost universally regarded as the better book. >>>> After nearly 15 years and countless hours of head banging I finally >>>> came to >>>> the conclusion that the MoQ just has too many problems. Since I just >>>> recently came to this conclusion, from a philosophical point of view >>>> I'm not >>>> sure how much is salvageable from either book. >>>>> I see it in almost every >>>>> bookstore I wander into and while Lila is there sometimes it is >>>> nowhere near >>>>> as ubiquitous. >>>> I always make it a point to check out where they are shelved in my >>>> local >>>> Barnes and Noble. They're always restocking and moving things a >> little >>>> based >>>> on shelf space. Both are always in or around "Oriental Religion" but >>>> you >>>> will sometimes find them the next shelf over in "New Age-Occult." >> Last >>>> time >>>> it was four copies of ZaMM in "Oriental Religion" and one forlorn >> copy >>>> of >>>> Lila at the bottom of the "Christianity" section. What a hoot! >>>>> I would almost recommend the opposite of what Paul Turner >>>>> suggested. He claimed that since Lila was later than ZMM, whenever >>>> there was >>>>> a conflict Lila should be regarded as taking precedence. I think >> Lila >>>> is >>>>> full of errors from the making of up of James quotes but the >> failure >>>> to >>>>> understand the basics of evolution. >>>>> >>>>> Here is an example of that which I haven't heard mentioned before. >>>> Take >>>>> Pirsig the social critic. He spends a lot of Lila talking about >>>> Victorians >>>>> and hippie and the radical social transformations of the '60s with >>>> very >>>>> little mention of civil rights and feminism. These were far more >>>> profound >>>>> and radical changes in the American way of doing things than the >>>> peace and >>>>> love anti-war movement of the hippies. It is hard to take serious >> any >>>>> analysis of trends in American culture of the 1960's that ignores >>>> civil >>>>> rights and feminism especially in a treatise on morality. >>>> Right. What about the Weatherman,SDS etc ? I recently heard >> somewhere >>>> that >>>> there were more acts of terroristic bombing and arson during that >>>> period >>>> than any other in American history. Pirsig, no comment. >>>>> I particularly agree that to the extent that Pirsig is trying to >> lay >>>> an >>>>> intellectual foundation for morality, he fails utterly. He doesn't >>>> even >>>>> address Mill and doesn't talk at all about Kant's ideas about >>>> morality other >>>>> than to call them ugly. He doesn't mention at all any contemporary >>>> thinkers >>>>> in morality. How are we to take this seriously? >>>> Right, just this morning before read your post I Googled "moral >>>> metaphysics" >>>> in addition to Kant and many, many others I found this: >>>> http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/eps/PES-Yearbook/95_docs/cunningham.html >>>> Any reference to Dewey's "Natural Metaphysics" or the whole class of >>>> similar >>>> work by others in Lila? >>>> >>>> Or this which I recently caught in a reread of "The Matrix and >>>> Philosophy" >>>> >>>> "...dialectics is a theory of evolution or progress. It is based on >>>> the...idea that the engine that drives motion and change...is the >>>> struggle >>>> of opposing forces. Someone who thinks dialectically thinks the of >> the >>>> world >>>> as a constantly evolving place, a place that life is never still. >>>> Moreover, >>>> a dialectician (which Pirsig forthrightly claims to be) thinks of >> the >>>> world >>>> as space in which oppositions between everything from individual >>>> molecules >>>> of matter to complex ideas are striving to reach new levels of >>>> consciousness >>>> and organization." >>>> >>>> Cross out "consciousness" and is this not a pretty good synopsis of >> the >>>> system MoQ proposes? Now the other shoe. The lead in to this >> paragraph >>>> before the first dots say: >>>> >>>> "The theoretical foundations of Marx's thought are derived, in part, >>>> from a >>>> novel reading of German philosopher G.W.F. Hegel's "dialectical" >>>> philosophies. In Marxist thought,..." >>>> >>>> Why no reference to Marx, and only these two for Hegel, in Lila? >>>> >>>>> A review of his book in the Harvard Educational Review had said >> that >>>> his idea >>>>> of truth was the same as James. The London Times said he was a >>>> follower of >>>>> Aristotle. Psychology Today said he was a follower of Hegel. If >>>> everyone was >>>>> right he had certainly achieved a remarkable synthesis. But the >>>> comparison >>>>> with James interested him most because it looked like there might >> be >>>> something >>>>> to it. (Lila 152) >>>> >>>>> He didn't like Hegel or any of the German idealists who dominated >>>> philosophy >>>>> in his youth precisely because they were so general and sweeping in >>>> their >>>>> approach.(Lila 152) >>>> >>>> The world wide consequence of Marxist definitively answers that >>>> question. >>>> >>>> The Matrix maybe an apt metaphor for Lila. >>>> >>>> Dave >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> 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 >>> >>> 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 > > 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
