Ian, On Sep 1, 2011, at 7:33 AM, Ian Glendinning wrote:
> You can see Marsha I'm sure, that slipping in ... > "but then it is ONLY [dmb's] opinion" > ... is your part of perpetuating the warring you refer to? I don't see it that way because it is _only my opinion_. I do not hold the Ultimate truth. Marsha > > With respect to the Ant quotations, there is an element of exposing - > on the one hand / on the other hand - counter arguments in a thesis / > dissertation, so we might not read strong agreement by Ant into his > statement of the view of Pirsig's deficiencies ? (Ant can speak for > himself on that. Matt has already pointed out tactical rhetorical > reasons why Pirsig might not have wanted to emphasise that aspect in > his writing at the time.) > > dmb's view there was interesting - I happen to believe there was > something of a straw-man in this passage > "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 critical of another's position is > more or less the same as being a dick." > But it is interesting that dmb states HIS attitude clearly. > > (Straw-man - because it really just side-steps a debate of what is > "intellectual merit" - no-one would claim to be unreasonable, not even > the overtly religious types. It's an open debate as to who's style of > debate is the more mature and constructive - Matt's point - and mine.) > Ian > > On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 11:42 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> 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 >> 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
