[JC earlier] I associate the romantic with art." [JC] Well actually, Arlo. I've had a problem with the 4th level for some time because it's labeled "intellectual" and imho, it ought to be labeled "artistic" or something similar because I see intellect as a species of art.
[JC to Ant] ... don't accuse me of anti-intellectualism just because I follow Pirsig's teaching in ZAMM. [Arlo] There is a HUGE disconnect here, and its more than a little deflating to have to even point it out. You DO NOT follow Pirsig's teachings in ZMM if you associate the romantic with art. The entire point of ZMM was to present the classic/romantic schism as a PROBLEM. Pirsig's self-stated goal was to show that using "this knife creatively and effectively can result in solutions to the classic and romantic split." (ZMM) And, "Phædrus' resolution of the entire problem of classic and romantic understanding occurred at first in this high country of the mind..." (ZMM) "And so in recent times we have seen a huge split develop between a classic culture and a romantic counterculture...two worlds growingly alienated and hateful toward each other with everyone wondering if it will always be this way, a house divided against itself." (ZMM) "The answer is Phædrus' contention that classic understanding should not be overlaid with romantic prettiness; classic and romantic understanding should be united at a basic level." (ZMM) "I think that the referent of a term that can split a world into hip and square, classic and romantic, technological and humanistic, is an entity that can unite a world already split along these lines into one." (ZMM) "Actually a root word of technology, techne, originally meant "art." The ancient Greeks never separated art from manufacture in their minds, and so never developed separate words for them." (ZMM) "So I guess what I'm trying to say is that the solution to the problem isn't that you abandon rationality but that you expand the nature of rationality so that it's capable of coming up with a solution." (ZMM) By 'associating the romantic with art', your simply denying that Pirsig offered a solution, indeed, you're denying there's a problem! You had asked me a for a quote to back-up my assertion that Pirsig's solution eliminates this distinction, above are several. In Pirsig's solution-space, the classical and the romantic modes are united. Indeed, as should be obvious, the very distinction in the first place was the PROBLEM. [JC] So I'd be fine with art and intellect on a continuum, with intellect at the static end and art at the dynamic. [Arlo] I'm not even sure how to frame a response to this, so I'll go back to ZMM and start with a simple substitution. For Pirsig, "Art is high-quality endeavor." (ZMM) If you "follow Pirsig's teaching in ZAMM", this substitution should be flawless. Instead, we get "I'd be fine with high-quality endeavor and intellect on a continuum, with intellect at the static end and high-quality endeavor at the dynamic." Certainly there are high-quality intellectual endeavors. What's apparent here is that you continue to use 'art' in its old 'romantic' distinction, you're back in the problem-space of ZMM and trying to criticize LILA on the basis that Pirsig's classic/romantic distinction is itself the solution, but also you appear to be confused in trying to map romantic/art/DQ and classic/intellect/SQ. "But the fact that Quality was the best way of uniting the two was no guarantee that the reverse was true - that the classic-romantic split was the best way of dividing Quality. It wasn't." (LILA) [JC] You don't want motorcycle maintainers to creatively form engine parts because it feels good, and you don't want art that's been produced by copying. [Arlo] Which is what you HAD in the problem-space of ZMM. It was a misunderstanding of Quality that led to the misunderstood way you speak here. Of COURSE, creatively forming engine parts feels good, when those parts are produced with a united appreciation of 'romantic' and 'classical' thought. And you're use of "art" is so limited here to refer almost exclusively to "artifacts". I am certainly grateful that my artfully constructed motorcycle 'copied' well-functioning design principles. In LILA, with the shift to 'static' and 'dynamic', we see that there is value to both 'copying' (preserving well-formed patterns) and 'creating' (pursuing even better patterns). I'll end here simply getting back to what I think is a critical comment in ZMM: "Art is the Godhead as revealed in the works of man." (ZMM) As such, art rests just as comfortably in a philosophical thesis as it does a Degas, in a mathematical set theory as it does in a performance of Bach's Cello Suite No. 1 by Yo-Yo Ma. By continuing the divorce 'art' from 'intellect', your not only not following Pirsig's teaching in ZMM, your arguing AGAINST it. 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
