Greetings,
>From Anthony's Ph.D. thesis:
"On the other hand, Pirsig's system remains a 'broad brush' as two (or more)
judgements concerned with a particular moral dilemma can rely on criteria
derived from the same evolutionary level. Moreover, there _is_ considerable
detail that Pirsig has overlooked from both Eastern and Western philosophical
traditions, through this can be provided, to some extent, by researching the
philosophers (such as Northrop, Nagarjuna and William James) who influenced his
work. No doubt, in-depth comparisons between Pirsig and these philosophers
would be beneficial in further clarifying the MoQ. Other issues overlooked by
Pirsig are the Taoist quietist concern with the environment; discrimination on
the grounds of race, gender culture and disability; the damage caused by global
capitalism and the Buddhis emphasis on compassion.
"Pirsig's failure to explicitly mention Buddhist compassion (karuna) in ZMM
or LILA is possibly his most serious oversight. Compassion is defined by
Rahula (1959, p.46) as representing universal... 'love, charity, kindness,
tolerance, and such noble qualities on the emotional side' qualified by the
following advice:
If one develops only the emotional neglecting the intellectual, one may
become a
good-hearted fool; while to develop only the intellectual side
neglecting the
emotional may turn one into a hard-hearted intellect without feeling
for others.
Therefore, to be perfect one has to develop both equally. That is the
aim of the
Buddhist way of life: in it wisdom and compassion are inseparably
linked together.
(Rahula, 1959, p.46)
"As numerous world problems are caused or aggravated due to lack of genuine
compassion, it appears highly plausible that an increased consideration of the
later would enhance the MoQ.
According to the _Buddha-dharma_... all the pain we bring to ourselves
and others
--- the hatred, the warring, the grovelling, the manipulation --- is
our own doing. It
comes from our own hearts and minds, out of our own confusion.
Furthermore, if we
don't see exactly what the problem is, we're going to perpetuate it.
We're going to
teach our children our confusion, and we'll go on, generation after
generation, doing
more of the same to ourselves and to each other. (Hagen, 1997, p.16)
(McWatt, Anthony, 'A Critical Analysis of Robert Pirsig's Metaphysics of
Quality', pp. 214-215)
Marsha:
I agree with Anthony when he states "Pirsig's failure to explicitly mention
Buddhist compassion (karuna) in ZMM or LILA is possibly his most serious
oversight."; and so think it is a very valid topic. Dmb's opinion is quite
interesting, but then it is only his opinion. imho
Marsha
On Aug 31, 2011, at 1:59 PM, david buchanan wrote:
>
>
>
> dmb says:
> On point one, it seems pretty clear to me that empathy would be among the
> "strong biological emotions" that serve to produce "social cohesion". Brain
> researchers think that empathy begins very early so that even babies can be
> made to laugh or cry simply by seeing a face that's laughing or crying. This
> kind of empathy can even be found among chimpanzees, which are our primate
> cousins. Also, I'm very pleases to discover that Pirsig thinks "compassion",
> when opposed to intellectual quality, can result in foolishness or even evil.
> That particular point supports a complaint I've made many times. Various
> posters have come through here, usually religious types, who insist that
> their philosophical positions shouldn't be judged on their intellectual
> merits, as if it's cruel to hold them to such standards, as if their position
> deserves respect simply because that position is held by a person and people
> deserve respect. This silly, self-centered attitude says, in effect, that
> being cr
it
> ical of another's position is more or less the same as being a dick. These
> are also the types of people that tend to brag about their magnificent
> humility. Yea, it's certainly foolish and sometimes it's downright evil. As I
> see it, if one is upset or offended by such criticism, it's time to get a new
> hobby because this place is going to be upsetting and offensive to them all
> the time. I tend to see such attitudes as a lack of maturity.
>
> On point two, it seems to me that genuine compassion is never, ever used to
> protect one's self from criticism. The person who uses compassion to deflect
> criticism or paint the critic as cruel is a manipulative bullshitter, an
> emotional blackmailer. That's evil. Such a person will see any and every
> criticism as a personal attack and so they are simply playing a different
> game, one that has nothing to do with philosophy or truth or any kind of
> proper intellectual conversation. Such a person is just too childish to play
> by the rules. If this were my forum, such persons would be banned precisely
> because they are not capable of playing adult games like philosophy.
>
> On point three, it seems to me that Pirsig is being a bit too modest. He's
> pointing out where compassion can be seen in the narratives of his books and
> that's true enough but it also seems obvious to me that his books are
> motivated by some rather epic compassion. There is a sense in which his aim
> is to heal a sick culture, to improve the course of Western civilization. I
> know that sounds uncomfortably grandiose but we are talking about a
> metaphysical system that is attempting to balance the shallow artlessness of
> our tacky, consumer culture. The dominant religion is, for the most part,
> stupid and childish and people think that freedom is about what you get at
> the mall. It's a nightmare, no?Anybody who tries to correct this state of
> affairs is a hero, I think. And that kind of corrective work shows a very
> large circle of compassion. It speaks to the whole civilization, if not the
> whole globe.
___
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
