John McConnell said:
...I find I have learned from him and benefited from his insights. What he and
I share is that we both have "skin in the game". Philosophy in general, and
Pirsig's philosophy in particular, are vitally important to John and me. It's
of pivotal significance to our personal trips. For us, it's not about winning
points in a scholarly debate; it's about wrestling with real issues of living,
and finding better ways of living and thinking that will help us and other
people to live with greater purpose and greater happiness. We're what DiSanto
and Steele (Guidebook to ZMM) refer to as "journey" philosophers instead of
"map" philosophers.
dmb says:
I see some major problems with this. First of all, you've set up a false
dichotomy so that a person either has "skin in the game" or a person cares
about scholarly standards. But there is no good reason to think that these two
things are mutually exclusive. Quite the opposite, in fact, because there is no
way to apply Pirsig's work to your personal life without first understanding
what his work means. It's like saying that you don't care about learning how to
drive because you're only interested in the actual road trip. But what's going
to happen on that journey if you can't drive? You'll surely crash and burn.
Ron DiSanto was a member of my thesis committee, by the way, so it's funny that
you should mention him in this context. And my thesis compared Pirsig, James
and Buddha. Accusations that I don't have skin in the game or that I've
excluded religion from the picture are very far from true. Frankly, I think it
would be fair to characterize such baseless accusations as nothing but
self-serving bullshit.
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
