[Arlo said to David Harding]
...Creation builds off existing patterns, the impetus to create, the 
pre-intellectual source of the creation, is Dynamic Quality, but the forms that 
emerge in its wake are made possible by the existing static patterns. It would 
not have been possible, for example, for a caveman to write ZMM. Phaedrus' 
insights, inspired by Dynamic Quality, built upon the existing strata of 
patterns of his experience.

[DMB]
Yes, I think we see a version of this idea in ZAMM's train analogy.

[Arlo]
I took the opportunity on a train ride this past weekend to revisit the 
Partially Examined Life podcast about Pirsig's ZMM. I wanted to take the 
opportunity to (1) re-encourage those who may have missed this to give this a 
listen, and (2) use the dialogue (below) from the podcast to draw the above 
point out explicitly.

==========
Partial Podcast Transcript [approximately 34:10 - 37:28]
[Dylan]
There's experience embedded in there, in some way, your experience with 
literature. On the face of it, while I understand the notion that 'well these 
students, they know what Quality is, they know what the Quality of these essays 
are', and they can judge it by pointing out to it. And you see the evidence of 
it because there's a kind of general ascension about it. Okay, I can buy that. 
But if I ask them all to go judge whether or not, well let's just say a 
motorcycle is operating correctly, they're not going to be able to do that 
unless they get some experience with that. They're going to have to go take it 
for a ride. They're going to have to do all kinds of things and gather 
experience with it and then maybe based upon that they're going to formualte a 
judgement about that Quality. But it seems to be there's got to be something 
happening and its not clear to me that its exactly pre-intellectual about 
processing that experience and maybe that's what he means by the Quality, b
 ut its not clear to me that its as simple as it being manifest in 'oh any 
freshman can judge whether its good writing or not' because that has along with 
it a whole bunch of baggage about their own experience with writing...

[Mark]
...Which he admits, but yeah I have trouble also reconciling that with the 
notion that these judgements are pre-intellectual. You have to recognize that 
it is an essay in order to judge that its a good essay. You have to understand 
the language. There's so many things, intellectually, that are going into, 
before this judgement comes up, that to say this has anything to do with the 
pre-intellectual just seems strange to me.

[DMB]
This is an excellent point. I've heard this objection many times, and I don't 
know if I've really come up with a very good reply to it. But there's a point 
where he uses a train as an analogy for the difference between theoretic 
knowledge, the things that you know, conceptual ideas and all that stuff, and 
then this pre-intellectual cutting edge experience. He asks us to image a huge 
freight train moving across the landscape, and this thing is like a mile long, 
and all the box cars are filled with all the concepts that we've inherited from 
the past, that we inherit from the language, you know the context of our 
culture. And that freight, that's got a lot of momentum, there's a lot of 
weight behind it. But at the cutting edge of that train, that's the 
pre-intellectual experience, and there's something about that whole train 
behind the front edge that informs the way you take the present moment. In 
other words, the present moment, that dynamic cutting edge of experience, that 
pr
 e-intellectual experience, is well-funded, not only by your own personal 
experience, but also by the collective experience of the culture in which you 
learn to think and speak. So you have a mile long train full of freight, and 
that always comes to bear on the present moment. Like you say, you know, a 
motorcycle mechanic, he's got to know how to use the tools, he's gotta know 
what the shape of this machine is, what it can do on the road, he's gotta have 
a lot of experience with motorcycles and machines to be a good enough 
motorcycle repairman to be considered an artist.
==========

[Arlo]
I really like the use of 'momentum' here, as it captures a movement that I 
think is missed sometimes in the 'static/dynamic' cleave, where all this static 
stuff is just sitting there doing nothing (or even inhibits activity). A Zen 
monk (who, say, has never repaired or fixed or even ridden a motorcycle) is not 
going to be able to figure out what the problem is with a motorcycle by just 
'killing static patterns'. There has to be this oscillation (to build off your 
use of 'momentum') between acquiring static knowledge and being open to Dynamic 
Quality. The present moment is this center point being 'push' and 'pull', 
between where the train has been and where the train is headed.

This is why a caveman could not have written ZMM, his train did not have 
sufficient 'momentum' to allow for that possibility. Its also why I am unsure 
about the use of meditation (quieting static patterns) without any discernible 
post-meditative improvement (to yourself or to the world). In every case I see 
in ZMM/LILA, the purpose of clearing the mind, of meditating, of habituated 
ritual, is to foster some 'bettering' of either one's abilities or one's 
insights. You're stuck, and you can't see a way out, so you clear your mind, 
you quiet the static patterns that have you blocked, and that moment of Dynamic 
Quality provides the way out. You habituated your repair activity so that you 
are open to little hints about problems you may not have otherwise seen. You 
respond to the materials better. The end result is a "well-maintained 
motorcycle".

I think 'momentum' also brings out one of the things I don't like about the 
term 'static'. In fact, I'm pretty sure you can just say 'patterns' without any 
need for the qualifier 'static'. But, these patterns are not just sitting 
there, they are going somewhere. Or, maybe more accurately, they are carrying 
us somewhere, and without them, and without the evolution built into the model, 
all the meditating and 'killing patterns' in the world won't make you a better 
mechanic (any more than being stuck in patterns that have brought the train to 
a stop will make you a better mechanic). 

The passage Mark alludes to, I think, is important. "The names, the shapes and 
forms we give Quality depend only partly on the Quality. They also depend 
partly on the a priori images we have accumulated in our memory. We constantly 
seek to find, in the Quality event, analogues to our previous experiences. If 
we didn't we'd be unable to act. ... The reason people see Quality differently, 
he said, is because they come to it with different sets of analogues." I think 
this underscore the importance of intellectual patterns (not to mention the 
social, biological, and inorganic patterns that inform our analogues). It is 
why the train is not 'dead weight' holding back the engine, but is the weight 
that provides the momentum that moves the train forward, as I said above it is 
what makes possible the forms that emerge in the wake of that present moment. 

In any event, if I haven't stated this already, very nicely done podcast, Dave. 
I think you continue to be a great ambassador for Pirsig's ideas. (As I 
mentioned to Marsha, I think the Partially Examined Life folk also did a great 
job with the Foucault podcast, the guest contributor Kate was extremely 
articulate and informative.) 


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