I read the conclusions to both, as I'm pressed for time. My first thoughts are ones personal to my experience with the book and philosophy, and so are admittedly skewed toward my own interests and biases. However, those thoughts are that 'intuition', to which she referred, is an issue I feel is important to touch upon regarding the purpose of these issues. I am a psych student, and in past posts have shown my dedication to the idea that our information processing processes in our brains are lateralized by hemisphere. I feel that these 'intuitions' are a very real way in which to understand, and make decisions about, 'truth' in our lives. Western culture and society, as most of you might agree, have overvalued logic and reason as the only true way toward 'truth'. What Pirsig did, in my opinion, is create a model with which to regard our (usually, handedness may shift this in some people) right hemisphere's unconscious processing tendencies and the trustworthiness of those gut-feelings, insights, and unconscious intuition; also, to make those processes on par with logic and reason, as in a complimentary dichotomy which nature has evolved in us as it makes the parts operate greater than the whole. Pirsig, I feel, meant to battle the SOM with MOQ because the brain uses both thinking styles to equal degree, with perhaps some natural and nurture produced individual difference involved (and like I said, possible genetic vs. social influence; ie., handedness/lateral predisposition vs. learned cultural values). I must say, I think most people would agree that these 'instinctual processes', if I understand them in MY own way, can be understood only by experience and not by definition - and thus we get Quality, Dynamic and Undefined. The call to arms against the overemphasis of logic and reason, and the undervaluing of intuition and insight is a battle I will continue to fight.
On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 9:27 AM, David Harding <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi All, > > > I’ve recently written a response to Ancient Greek Philosophy Academic > Catherine Rowett’s paper on ZMM. > > > Thanks go to Catherine for not ignoring ZMM and Ant for comments on final > draft. > > > Links: > > > Catherine’s original paper: > > > > https://www.academia.edu/172951/Absolute_goodness_rhetoric_and_rationality_a_discussion_of_Robert_Pirsigs_novel_Zen_and_the_art_of_motorcycle_maintenance_and_Platos_Phaedrus > > > > The response paper: > > > > https://www.academia.edu/11703364/A_review_of_Absolute_goodness_rhetoric_and_rationality_a_discussion_of_Robert_Pirsig_s_novel_Zen_and_the_Art_of_Motorcycle_Maintenance_and_Plato_s_Phaedrus._ > > > > Love to hear any feedback. > > > Best, > > > David. > > > 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
