On Nov 7, 2011, at 4:57 PM, Matt Kundert wrote: > > >> On Nov 6, 2011, at 5:39 PM, Matt Kundert wrote: >> >>> >>> Hi Marsha, >>> >>>> On Nov 6, 2011, at 3:32 PM, Matt Kundert wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Marsha, >>>>> >>>>> What you've presented are two conflicting passages from Pirsig. >>>>> That does need to be taken seriously long enough to offer some >>>>> explanation for what one takes the conflict to mean. I will refrain >>>>> from being haughty about my own explanation, though I don't think >>>>> you'll like it any better than, say, Dave's. But at least what needs to >>>>> be taken seriously will have been taken seriously. >>>>> >>>>> How I deal with the conflict: I don't take his statement in 2005 >>>>> seriously. I think his blanket statement that the MoQ is "not intended >>>>> to be within any philosophic tradition" is true but misleading: I think >>>>> it only means that he didn't intend the MoQ to be pragmatism, but >>>>> rather found pragmatism to be helpful in explicating it for a certain >>>>> kind of audience. I also think his claim that the "central claim" of the >>>>> MoQ is "not part of any philosophic tradition" is terribly misleading at >>>>> best. I think it can be shown that Kant initiated a tradition of >>>>> thinking about reality (as rooted in normativity) that Pirsig takes part >>>>> in. >>>> >>>> Marsha: >>>> I think the "although obviously it was not written in a vacuum." >>>> acknowledges >>>> other philosophic influences, so I won't dismiss the 2005 statement as >>>> you do. When RMP states that the MoQ "is not intended to be WITHIN any >>>> philosophic tradition" he means just that, especially when he writes of >>>> a relationship to quantum physics. >>> >>> No, you're right about acknowledging influences, but I don't think that >>> eliminates what I take to be misleading. (And I don't like the word >>> "dismiss." I think that implies a rhetorical attitude to me about Pirsig >>> that I do not hold. If you have it in your heart to take me to be >>> sincere, I would appreciate it if you understood my attitude to Pirsig's >>> writings to not be occasionally dismissive, but rather as sifting through >>> with care.) >> >> Marsha: >> I didn't state that YOU shouldn't dismiss anything. I wrote "so _I_ won't >> dismiss", but if you prefer I can change it to: "so I still take seriously >> RMP's 2005 statement." > > You wrote "I won't dismiss the 2005 statement _like you do_." I'm > sensitive to this because I have an imputed reputation for being > dismissive of Pirsig, or just in general.
Marsha: Okay, I stand corrected. _I_ won't dismiss the 2005 statements and still take them seriously to represent his most recent thoughts on the subject. >> Also, it was to dmb's claiming that RMP's MoQ >> was "explicitly identifying" with "American Pragmatism" that I directed >> my posts, not to you or your comments. RMP has explicitly stated that >> "the MoQ is not intended to be within any philosophic tradition". > > Yeah, I know. But, as it happens like Dave, I don't see the conflict > between "explicitly identifying" oneself with a per-existing tradition > and "not intending to be within any particular tradition" if the two > statements are understood in a certain manner. I tried articulating > a manner in which there's no conflict. I don't see Pirsig as exactly > changing positions between '91 and '05, and that's partly because I > see the '05 passage to be fully commensurate with the stance he > struck in the '91 passages on philosophology. Marsha: And I still take RMP's 2005 statement "The Metaphysics of Quality is not intended to be within any philosophic tradition" to mean he does not have it in his mind that the MoQ should be put within any philosophic traditions. He goes on in the next sentence to explain why: "The Metaphysics of Quality's central idea that the world is nothing but value is not part of any philosophic tradition that I know of." 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
