[Arlo] Like you, I am making my way through this. Bearning in mind that this is NOT a dissertation on Pirsig's philosophy (as is Ant's), I was reading it with less scrutiny, perhaps. So, I've went back and reread the author's introduction and conclusions several times. I don't see the misunderstandings you imply above (can you give specific instances in the text where you read this?).
Andre: Thanks Arlo, it indeed is not a dissertation on Pirsig’s philosophy. I have read the pieces on her reading of ZMM and LILA from her perspective and must say that von Dahlern makes some worthwhile and interesting comments once again from her perspective. However I must say that there are still things irritating. I’ll cite a few below: On page 209 von Dahlem asks: If intellectual activity does not automatically lead to the right understanding of Quality, how can we prove that the MOQ is correct? How can human beings ever be sure that every single person is able to live truly morally? How can they make others find the right path? ...Yet, it is impossible to logically defend the position that certain human beings have been intellectually wrong for centuries…and that Phaedrus…can suddenly be right. On page 210: There is no good and evil, there is only power… . This literary quote could be altered to describe the MOQ as follows: There is no good and evil, there is only Quality. >From footnote 890: In the end the MOQ has to prove that Dynamic Quality exists >and is really the source of the whole universe, which is done indirectly. >Communicative foundationalist ethics has to prove that human beings are first >and foremost communicative human beings,which is done directly….In addition, >the communicative foundationalist world view can explain the human individual >who is able to describe and understand reality far more clearly than the MOQ. I could go on for a bit longer where von Dahlem assesses the relationship between Lila and Phaedrus (he is not a very compassionate human being) and even the notion that she (von Dahlem) appears to have difficulties with Pirsig’s secluded lifestyle. But leave it for now. Even though she did refer to Anthony’s PhD she clearly does not refer to the AHP tapes or the annotations in Lila”s Child nor to other valuable materials available (e.g the DvD’s Anthony produced and made available). I can only speculate of course if this would have made a difference but still contend that her remarks/judgements/valuations here and there throughout the relevant sections are somewhat contentious and certainly open to questioning. dmb: But it's still pretty cool that Pirsig's work increasingly appears in academic literature. Nothing will advance the MOQ like a good debate in that arena. Andre: Yes David, very true. Thanks to you both. 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
