My 19 year old daughter did something strange to my metaphorical brain the other day, along these lines you lay out here. She wrote the numbers 3.14 down and asked me, "what's this dad?" And I told her, Pi. And then she said, read it backwards, what does it spell? And since her "4" was constructed in such a way as to appear very like a backwards "p". I saw immediately, in a sort of Grecian scripty way, exactly what she was getting at. Something I'd never noticed before.
On Dec 19, 2011, at 12:27 PM, David Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > All, > > This and other threads for the last few weeks have been exploring > "psychology" vis-a-viz Pirsig's work. I suppose this was stimulated by the > posting of Andre's transcript of RMP's AHP presentation on Ant's website. I > remember when I first skimmed it I was struck when I heard these things," > > "My wife and I both went down and we were planning what we would do today > and say today and one question that came up was: "What in the world does a > Metaphysics of Quality have to do with psychotherapy?" and I said "Well, it > provides an overview... it provides you [with] a kind of a road map, a kind > of a structure, a theory of everything into which the practice of psychiatry > and psychology might fit...." > > 'And… I think his [answer to this] question will be "I don't know. That's > not my department, that's your department" > > Then in response being asked and reading Maslow's work he says, " It's not > my field, so it's a real surprise to me to see that he was saying a lot of > things....." > > What? It's not your "department", your "field"? I seem to recall Phaedrus > being taken aback by the Chairman's asking about his, "substantive field." > Particularly when he stating that "English" (writing?) was not one! > Then, "You're proposing a radically new metaphysics, a theory of everything, > and you overlooked psychology? Which Wiki defines as, "... is the study of > the mind, partly via the study of behavior.[1] Its immediate goal is to > understand individuals and groups by both establishing general principles > and researching specific cases.[2][3]" > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology > > How can one subscribe to James' "radical empiricism" and not be at least > mildly interested in psychology given he is thought of as the "father of > American psychology?" How can one point to Buddhist philosophy and not > understand that, in addition to its philosophy, it is the oldest, > continuously running, "brand" of psychotherapy on the planet? A > psychotherapy you now seem to subscribe to, or practice in some degree? > > But then I remembered that Pirsig's experience with the practice of American > psychotherapy had not been a particularly pleasant experience. Enough so > that it might put one off his feed and the field forever. And psychology > suffers from the same or similar problems as he found in anthropology. They > are both one set of humans trying to study other sets of humans. How does, > or can one, do that without introducing all kinds of personal, social, or > cultural biases? And by trying limit these biases do you create the Boas > problem? Or the Dusenberry problem? As Mark has eluded to since their > conception there has always been a skepticism by "hard" sciences to the > "science" of the humanities. It's "quasi-science" or "soft" science, with > psychology perhaps being one of the "softest". I think this is an > unfortunate application of adjectives. Psychology is actually a very, very, > hard science to do. Astrophysics or quantum mechanics is actually a breeze > to do and understand compared to trying to understand the working of any > mind, even your own. > > Later on in the AHP transcript we read: > > Question? 'If value doesn't inhere in either the subject or the object, and > we react to it on a non-intellectual basis as you indicated in your recent > comments is this not a sort of , that it is some sort of transcendental or > even Platonic in that philosophical sense which we tune into when we address > a student essay or a watch or whatever… am I correct in my view?' > > Pirsig: 'I think that is correct, yes.' > > Question: 'My question is leading to the intuitive value of it… you quiet > your mind, you get a lot of back ground noise out the room, are you tapping > into your intuitive self or is it the innate good that you are addressing?' > > Pirsig: 'The term "intuitive" is a competitive word with Quality actually. > Intuitive, I see as a mixture of Dynamic Quality and emotional quality or > some biological quality. But I do see what you mean by intuitive in this > particular context, I think it's what I mean by Dynamic Quality.' > > Here's a personal "intuitive" example for you. After reading this for some > reason my mind started running through the ABC's..... Like I was trying to > remember where "Q" fell or something. "..pause HIJK...pause...LMNOP...pause > QRS.....wait a minute, wait a minute!" Isn't that odd "Q" is bracketed by R > and P. The first letters of Pirsig's first and last name. And then the > series ...MNOPQ.. If you strike the "N" you have, not only the letters of > MOQ, but RMP the first letters of his full name. Strange. Continuing you get > to M-OPQR the acronym for "Metaphysics of Psychological Quality Reform" > > Oh yes, the psychology, or theory of the mind and it's workings are going to > be very, very hard indeed. And the MoQ is of course dependant on it. > > Jeez, I think I may need therapy! But I too fear the men in the white coats. > > Dave > > > > > > > > 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
