Arlo quoted Marsha:
"In fact, when proposed that I could perhaps interpret ZMM and Lila in a way
different from some, this was also met with incredulity. Any good book has
multiple interpretations, and nobody has rights to the correct interpretation."
Arlo said:
... I think a sentiment like "it's all interpretation" is readily evident. In a
world where nobody has rights to the correct interpretation, please tell me how
Ron's "interpretation" of Pirsig's MOQ supporting rape and torture would be
dismissed?
dmb says:
I guess Marsha thinks that interpretive freedom means never having to answer
any
criticism. It means you don't have to worry about making sense. Imagine how
much
work that would save! How how lonely that would be.
Don't you think that even the amoeba needs to "interpret" the acid rightly?
Doesn't this "interpretive" capacity go all the way down so that everything
exists in relation to everything else? Isn't reality just an infinite number of
overlapping inter-related dialogues? The shark can't read but blood in the
water
has real meaning and real import and he "understands" that meaning or he dies.
In the interpretation business, being wrong has real consequences. While it's
not likely that anyone ever died from a bad reading of metaphysics but I think
we could say that Marsha's interpretation move her TOWARD the poison of
nihilism
and it starves her of the new expanded rationality that Pirsig offers.
Ron interjects:
That is precicely what the consequences are for this pattern of thought, it
neglects the good.
To say that some things are better than others is saying that some
interpretations are better
than others. It's what we mean when we say that something is "truer" than
another, what we mean
when we say it is more correct.
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
