On Sat, Jul 9, 2011 at 12:37 PM, MR.Brown wrote to all:

 ..."Almost every discussion of Pirsig, ... that I've seen eventually resembles 
the Church of Reason intellectualizing criticized so adeptly in ZAMM. And what 
I have not yet seen, ever, is an expression of passionate emotion. There's 
obviously passionate emotion in ZAMM, and I've always been grateful that RP 
touches sexuality in L - so where's the expression of this passion in those who 
have been influenced by him? Am I missing it? What's the subjective importance 
of this writer to those who love him?


dmb says:

As I see it, Pirsig's aim is to expand rationality, to fully admit human 
interests and feelings as important and necessary factors in construction of 
our beliefs and philosophies. And the main idea behind this expansion is to 
reverse an age-old problem, namely the subordination of everything else to 
reason. William James calls it "vicious intellectualism". Neither one of them 
are anti-intellectual like some slack-jawed hick, of course, but they both 
think that ideas are not to be worshipped, that they are great and good only to 
the extent that they serve life. Laughter, tears and nookie are part of life 
too, but Pirsig has written two philosophical novels. He's not opposed to 
intellectualizing and in his second book he says intellect is the highest and 
most moral level of static quality, subordinate only to DQ. Of course, artistic 
or intellectual creativity is not the same as sexuality or passionate emotions 
and I think the expansion of rationality would involve more subtle a
 nd refined sense of what's attractive and exciting on that higher level. 
Elegant, powerful, inspiring ideas, you know, - and not hot bodies or whatever. 
This is the lesson about Lila, right? Intellectually she's nowhere, socially 
she's pretty far down the scale and biologically she's fading fast. She's 
nobody, practically an animal. She's breaking up, about to change, and it's a 
good thing too because she can't get much worse. It's gonna be death, the nut 
house or, if she's lucky, church.

No, Pirsig doesn't advocate regression to the lower levels. He's not 
anti-intellectual so much as he's opposed to attitudes of objectivity, to the 
idea of objective truth, to the notion of disinterested observation and the dry 
old voice of brittle logic. Instead, he says that Man is a participant in the 
creation of all things, that our ways of thinking and talking have always 
served human needs and interests and it's foolish to pretend otherwise. We 
carve out everything, James says. It is in that sense that rationality gets 
expanded by including the affective domain. This means the church of reason is 
reformed, not demolished. 

And personally, nothing seemed worth doing until I decided to go back to school 
to study philosophy. I wanted to be passionate about something but everything 
seemed boring. Then I met McWatt and Pirsig and it dawned on me how much that 
would be. That was six years ago, I just finished school and it surely has been 
fun so far. 





                                          
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