Marsha, dmb, dmb, At risk of mounting your frustration: 1) thanks again for a good set of excerpts. And, 2) I'm 'a butt in because I hope that this thread gets back to where it was going (I don't have the formal background, so I may flub things up on the formal side here).
Marsha, so, first, there was the point he was making to Steve and Matt about: "[DMB] The important idea here is that this central term (Quality in the first book and Dynamic Quality in the second book) is outside of language and outside of the mythos." (I might say a leap of faithe amongst the unknown will always be at the fore, even if we can eventually fill out some aspects of Quality (= Morality), and DQ, with language (math).) second, as you point out, the static intellectual (which doesn't come explicitly until LILA), or, less completely, rational / analytic thought must have a dynamic aspect. "[DMB] It makes the dynamic a crucial phase in the overall cognitive process." And, "[DMB] In Lila, this notion will become the operation of Dynamic Quality within the scientific process itself, ... (cut off to be resumed)" But, third, and I would say this is 'the important idea' regarding your interjection now, is that this dynamic aspect is not a mere PASSIVE thing which happens to (a flowing static) you: you are integral in it. It is the intellect which gives the 'direction' - well, it is not necessarily limited to the intellect; you give it direction though, anyway. See: "[RMP] But about the Buddha that exists WITHIN analytic thought, and GIVES THAT ANALYTIC THOUGHT ITS DIRECTION, virtually nothing has been said, ..." "[DMB](continuing where I cut off in the second point)... the co-operation of DQ and intellectual static quality." - where I'll highlight 'co-'. "[DMB] What he's trying to do is expand rationality or intellect." "[RMP] "The difference between a good mechanic and a bad one, like the difference between a good mathematician and a bad one, is precisely this ability to SELECT ..." Finally, I think this puts all three together: "[DMB] This value-force is pre-intellectual and yet he's asserting "the formal recognition of Quality" within intellectual operations. That's what radical empiricism does. It makes the dynamic a crucial phase in the overall cognitive process. It explains the relations between the dynamic and static phases of experience as aspects of a single, co-operative process." And, while I'm at it: "[DMB] It's about bringing all your faculties to bear and a deep engagement with whatever you're doing. It is aimed at down to earth stuff, which a lofty and worthy goal. It's also exceedingly sane, because that's where we live; practical, everyday reality." --- very nice. Thanks again, Tim On Sat, 18 Dec 2010 02:17:36 -0500, "MarshaV" <[email protected]> said: > > dmb, > > It sounds like you are explaining that you like your philosophic > explanation of reality to include a dynamic aspect. If not, please > explain the exact point of this post and how the quotes support your > position. > > > Marsha > > > > > On Dec 17, 2010, at 2:19 PM, david buchanan wrote: > > > > > Gents, I'm not changing the subject. But I'm going to approach it from a > > different angle and dispense with the polemics for a change too. > > > > Up to a point, there is an affinity between James's image (the human snake > > coils over everything), the neo-pragmatic slogan (it's language all the way > > down), and Pirsig's sand sorting analogy: > > > > "To understand what he was trying to do it's necessary to see that PART of > > the landscape, INSEPARABLE from it, which MUST be understood, is a figure > > in the middle of it, sorting sand into piles. To see the landscape without > > seeing this figure is not to see the landscape at all. To reject that part > > of the Buddha that attends to the analysis of motorcycles is to miss the > > Buddha entirely. ... About the Buddha that exists independently of any > > analytic thought much has been said - some would say TOO much, and would > > question any attempt to add to it. But about the Buddha that exists WITHIN > > analytic thought, and GIVES THAT ANALYTIC THOUGHT ITS DIRECTION, virtually > > nothing has been said, and there are historic reasons for this. But history > > keeps happening, and it seems no harm and maybe some positive good to add > > to our historical heritage with some talk in this area of discourse." > > (ZAMM, p. 83 (Emphasis is Pirsig's)) > > > > dmb continues: > > The Buddha that exists WITHIN analytic thought. This is what's interesting. > > In Lila, this notion will become the operation of Dynamic Quality within > > the scientific process itself, the co-operation of DQ and intellectual > > static quality. But in ZAMM Pirsig is not yet using such terms and yet his > > central aim to to expand and improve rationality by re-integrating > > "Quality" into it from the ground up. This Buddha talk is not aimed at > > converting anyone to Buddhism anymore than his comparisons between > > "Quality" and the Tao. What he's trying to do is expand rationality or > > intellect. > > > > > > "No, he did nothing for Quality or the Tao. What benefited was reason. He > > showed a way by which reason may be expanded to include elements that have > > previously been unassimilable and thus have been considered irrational." > > (ZAMM, p. 257) > > > > "Quality is the Buddha. Quality is scientific reality. Quality is the goal > > of Art. It remains to work these concepts out into a practical, > > down-to-earth context, and for this there is nothing more practical or > > down-to-earth than what I have been talking about all along - the repair of > > old motorcycle." (ZAMM, p. 276) > > > > "I want to show that that classic pattern of rationality can be > > tremendously improved, expanded and made far more effective through the > > formal recognition of Quality in its operation." (ZAMM, p. 278) > > > > "The difference between a good mechanic and a bad one, like the difference > > between a good mathematician and a bad one, is precisely this ability to > > SELECT the good facts from the bad ones on the basis of quality. .. I think > > that it will be found that a formal acknowledgment of the role of Quality > > in the scientific process doesn't destroy the empirical vision at all. It > > expands it, strengthens it and brings it far closer to actual scientific > > practice." (ZAMM, p. 281-2) > > > > "... Dynamic Quality [is] the value-force that chooses an elegant > > mathematical solution to a laborious one, or a brilliant experiment over a > > confusing, inconclusive one ... Dynamic value is an integral part of > > science. It is the cutting edge of scientific progress itself." (LILA, p. > > 366) > > > > dmb resumes: > > I take these examples literally. The mechanic, the mathematician, the > > scientist and philosophers are all working within systems of rationality. > > They're all doing intellectual work within the limits of language and > > reason. But Pirsig is keen to get at "the Buddha that exists within > > analytic thought, and gives that analytic thought its direction". This move > > solves a whole slough of philosophical problems, but I think the main idea > > here is to improve actual mechanics, scientists and philosophers. It's > > about bringing all your faculties to bear and a deep engagement with > > whatever you're doing. It is aimed at down to earth stuff, which a lofty > > and worthy goal. It's also exceedingly sane, because that's where we live; > > practical, everyday reality. > > > > And that, gents, is why I object to the neo-pragmatic slogan. Pirsig agrees > > that our understanding of the world is a pile of analogies BUT he also says > > that Quality is the generator of this mythos, guides the train that pulls > > the boxcars full of analogies. The important idea here is that this central > > term (Quality in the first book and Dynamic Quality in the second book) is > > outside of language and outside of the mythos. This value-force is > > pre-intellectual and yet he's asserting "the formal recognition of Quality" > > within intellectual operations. That's what radical empiricism does. It > > makes the dynamic a crucial phase in the overall cognitive process. It > > explains the relations between the dynamic and static phases of experience > > as aspects of a single, co-operative process. This "formal acknowledgment > > of the role of Quality in the scientific process doesn't destroy the > > empirical vision at all. It expands it, strengthens it and brings it far > > closer to actual scientific prac ti > ce > > ." > > > > Again, I take the slogan to be a negative epistemological statement. It > > doesn't say the universe is made of words. It says that we can't get > > outside of language in an epistemological sense. It says our truths can > > only be justified within language and by language. But Pirsig is saying > > there is something outside of language that IS epistemologically important, > > that is the generator of language and this is a part of experience too. One > > of the ways he uses to show that Quality is real by showing how the world > > can't function normally without it and trying to effect a repair job on a > > mode of rationality that functions badly without it. Rationality itself is > > the bike he's working on and fixing it entails a formal acknowledgment of > > the role of Quality in the overall cognitive process. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 -- [email protected] -- http://www.fastmail.fm - IMAP accessible web-mail 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
