dmb, >From these quotes you seem to have extracted and formulated some kind of >belief that you think I violate. But accusing me of violating your ambiguous >beliefs is silly and not something I am not willing to give time to. Please >extract from these RMP quotes the precise symbols and exact rules in which you >think I lack coherence and I will take a serious look at them. And if >possible, do it with some seriousness and without the sarcasm, irony, parody >and insults. Marsha
On May 24, 2013, at 11:13 PM, david buchanan wrote: > John and Sylvia, the Sutherlands, were real people but in Pirsig's first book > they also represented millions of people who, like them, felt alienated by > technology and our technological world. We start out with ghost stories and > little repair lessons involving handlebars and beer-can shims. But before you > know it, he has you thinking about the foundations of science and the kind of > metaphysics behind our scientific world. And then, by time we get to the > artful mechanic, we even reach mystical peaks. > The art of motorcycle maintenance is miniature study in the art of > rationality itself, he says. The solution is not to run away from technology > or science or rationality. No, Pirsig wants to show us how the Buddha resides > in the gears of a motorcycle every bit as much as the lotus flower. That's a > metaphor for science and rationality too. That's the aspect of the Buddha > that hasn't been talked to death already. > That's what static intellectual quality, as it's construed in his second, is > supposed to be all about. This is not a contest between gears and lotus > flowers. It's not a contest between intellectuals and mystics. It's about > Pirsig's reformation of rationality, where Quality and value are integrated > into intellectual values. They're are distinctly different but they're not > mutually exclusive. They are supposed to work together. That's the whole > point of the MOQ! > But what does Marsha put on display day after day after day? > > A profound alienation from anything and everything intellectual! Kill, kill, > kill the philosophers! Logic is for losers! Definitions are degenerate! And > how many other MOQers echo this upside down, totally backwards nonsense? One > is too many. > > Dumping on the motorcycle gears is dumping the lotus is dumping on the Buddha > is dumping yourself is dumping on the world. There is no freaking way that > this counts as a good idea by Pirsig's lights. Not a chance. > > > I'll reproduce the evidence so it can be ignored once > again.------------------------- > > "Thus did he seek to turn the attack. The subject for analysis, the patient > on the table, was no longer Quality, but analysis itself. Quality was healthy > and in good shape. Analysis, however, seemed to have something wrong with it > that prevented it from seeing the obvious." > > > "A real understanding of Quality doesn't just serve the System, or even beat > it or even escape it. A real understanding of Quality CAPTURES the system, > tames it, and puts it to work for on'w own personal use, while leaving one > completely free to fulfill his inner destiny." (ZAMM, p.223) > > > "I don't mind the Quality, it's just that all the classical talk about it > ISN'T Quality. Quality is just a focal point around which a lot of > intellectual furniture is getting re-arranged." (ZAMM, p.223) > > > "I think furthermore, that all his metaphysical mountain climbing did > absolutely nothing to further either our understanding of what Quality is or > of what the Tao is. Not a thing. That sounds like an overwhelming rejection > of what he said and thought, but it isn't. I think it's a statement that he > would have agreed with himself, since any description of Quality is a kind of > definition and must therefore fall short of its mark. ...No, he did nothing > for Quality or the Tao. What benefitted was reason. He showed a way by which > reason may be EXPANDED to include elements that have previously been > unassimilable and thus have been considered irrational. I think it's the > overwhelming presence of these irrational elements crying for assimilation > that creates the present bad quality, the chaotic disconnected spirit of the > twentieth century." (ZAMM, p. 257) > > > "I think that it will be found that a formal acknowledgment of the role of > Quality in the scientific process doesn't destroy the empirical vision at > all. It expands it, strengthens it and brings it far closer to actual > scientific practice." (ZAMM) > > > Similarly, in LILA Pirsig wrote: > > > "The Metaphysics of Quality says that science's empirical rejection of > biological and social values is not only rationally correct, it is also > morally correct because the intellectual patterns of science are of a higher > evolutionary order than the old biological and social patterns. But the > Metaphysics of Quality also says that Dynamic Quality - the value-force that > chooses an elegant mathematical solution to a laborious one, or a brilliant > experiment over a confusing, inconclusive one-is another matter altogether. > Dynamic Quality is a higher moral order than static scientific truth, and it > is as immoral for philosophers of science to try to suppress Dynamic Quality > as it is for church authorities to suppress scientific method. Dynamic value > is an integral part of science. It is the cutting edge of scientific progress > itself." > > > > > > 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
