Hi Arlo,
Nothing to regret as far as I can see.

My point is not to denigrate the intellectual by any means.  The
education I received has allowed me to be of use to the community in
terms of health care.  Currently I am working on cancer drugs which
will certainly be beneficial to the individual.

The point I was trying to make involved the mindless following of an
individual's words due to his/her "credentials".  One is not
"somebody" due to his/her biography.  One is "somebody" through their
daily actions and Will.  Quality is every expressing, and not
necessarily cumulative.  As I have claimed in many previous posts, the
scourge of "leaders and followers" can account for much of the low
quality which society presents.  Nobody can tell us what Quality is.
However, paths of high Quality can indeed be proposed.  Such proposals
do not require cumulative knowledge per se.  That Pirsig is not a
credentialed philosopher in the Halls of academia makes not difference
to me.

Technology, which is cumulative and passed on from one generation to
the next is progressive, and reduces much suffering from a physical
standpoint.  I believe the contention in ZMM was that there was an
imbalance between the "Truth" which is promoted and the "Quality"
which is inherent.  Despite the advances in the enumeration of things,
at the human core nothing has changed.  Despite its structural
approach, MoQ seeks to rebalanced the Epistemology/Ontology debate by
putting more emphasis on ontology (imo, of course).  It is the balance
between positivism and realism.  Neither alone is sufficient.

I believe that when Pirsig suggests to "Kill all Intellectual
Patterns", he is providing rhetoric to combat the static world of
words that we find ourselves.  That is, Stop trying to find truth
through words, but rely on something much deeper that we all have.
Certainly the concept of killing intellectual patterns is an
intellectual pattern.  However, the suggestion does open the door for
personal balance.  It is difficult to open that door using the tools
we have been provided by our indoctrinating education, since that is
like trying to open a door with the wrong key.  The idea is to
persuade others to at least try to think differently.  It is not
dogma, it is rhetoric.

So, I am not against intellectuals or their ideas by any means.  I
enjoy reading posts in this forum, for example.  It is possible that
extremes are sometimes best dealt with through extremes.  The
dialectic can indeed bring about balance rather than truth.  So, we
should not become dumber, we should become more aware (whatever that
means).  Using the analogy of balance is one method that I use to make
sense of things.

Cheers,
Mark

On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 8:22 PM, ARLO J BENSINGER JR <[email protected]> wrote:
> [Mark to Marsha]
> I spent 6 years doing do doctorate of philosophy (Ph.D.) work, and was 
> ordained
> by the powers that be at Oxford.  I then spent years in internship.  Does this
> make me a philosopher?  Does this make me anything?  I think not.
>
> [Arlo]
> Maybe it's late. Maybe its the Bourbon. Maybe I'm going to regret this...
>
> Why does this not make you anything, Mark? Let's step back and say a degree in
> Art History doesn't make you a painter (or dancer, or poet, etc), but it still
> makes you something. I mean, if it didn't improve you, then what was the 
> point?
> Have we really hit a point when 'knowledge', however defined, is a 'bad 
> thing'??
>
> Can you think, for example, of a single other 'profession' that actually
> champions 'never studied this'?... Do you want a surgeon who says "I never
> studied this 'heart' crap, but hey, I have certain beliefs about human nature
> an that makes me qualified to do this."?...
>
> See, this is part of this anti-intellectual agenda I don't understand... yes,
> there IS a difference between doing philosophy and reading about philosophy,
> between being an expert in Nietzsche and not knowing who Nietzsche was... and
> call that philosophy/philosophology, but do we really want to turn that into a
> championing of ignorance? Do you think Pirsig really meant by that that we
> should become dumber to become more enlightenend?...
>
> 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
>
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