Hi Kevin and Group:
Kevin, the more I read your arguments elevating mysticism to a higher
moral level than intellect the more I'm reminded of the following
passage from Lila. Chap. 24, p.346 Bantam:
"In the twenties it had been thought that society was the cause of man's
unhappiness and that intellect would cure it, but in the sixties it was
thought that both society and intellect together were the cause of all the
unhappiness and that transcendence of both society and intellect would
cure it. Whatever the intellectuals of the twenties had fought to create, the
flower children of the sixties fought to destroy. Contempt for rules,
material possessions, for war, for police, for science for technology were
standard repertoire. The "blowing" of the mind was important. Drugs that
destroyed one's ability to reason were almost a sacrament. Oriental
religions such as Zen and Vedanta that promised release from the prison
of the intellect were taken up as gospel. The cultural values of blacks and
Indians, to the extent that there were anti-intellectual were mimicked.
Anarchy became the most popular politics and squalor and poverty and
chaos became the most popular life styles. Degeneracy was practiced
for degeneracy's sake. Anything was good that shook off the paralyzing
grip of the social-intellectual Establishment."
When you say things like: "And oh what dreams may come when we
have shuffled off this intellectual coil" followed by five exclamation points,
and that "Mysticism is closest to Dynamic Quality because ... it embraces
the unity of reality ... (that) should be valued above all else," perhaps
you�ll understand where I get the idea you miss the Sixties.
Lest you believe in your heart of hearts that Pirsig also longs for a return
to the philosophy of the flower children, let me hasten to bring up another
quote from Lila where he extols the values and virtues of science-based
intellectualism:
"It's ironic that although the philosophy of science leaves no room for any
undefined Dynamic activity, it's science's unique organization for the
handling of the Dynamic that gives it its superiority. Science superseded
old religious forms, not because what it says is more true in any absolute
sense (whatever that is) but because what it says is more Dynamic."
Bantam, p. 254.
When Pirsig says science is more Dynamic than mysticism (old religious
forms), he flatly contradicts your claim that "You should also respect, as
Pirsig does, that mysticism and intuition are . . . superior to the
intellectual level." Only once does Pirsig hint that there might be a higher
moral level than the intellectual, and that�s when he suggests that perhaps
it might be �a code of art.� (Chap. 13).
Platt
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
