Hi Bo and Group:
Pirsig struggled over defining Quality.
"What made all this so formidable to Phaedrus was that he himself
had insisted in his book that Quality cannot be defined. Yet here he
was about to define it. Was this some kind of a sell-out? His mind
went over this many times.� (p. 74.)
Then follows an argument with himself where at first he says that
trying to define Quality and writing a metaphysics is �in the strictest
mystic sense" a degenerate activity. But then in a complete
turnabout, he argues that being a purist about not polluting the
mystic reality of the world is itself a form of degeneracy.
Now what is happening here? Pirsig is �rationalizing" his switch from
not defining Quality to defining Quality. As Bo himself asserts, an
intellectual pattern is subject/object logic. The logical paradox here is
that Pirsig assumes the validity of s/o logic prior to using s/o logic to
justify using s/o logic (metaphysics) to describe reality. I believe in
law that's called, "assuming a fact not yet in evidence." or more
commonly, "putting the cart before the horse."
True, assuming the validity of s/o logic as a means "to say one thing
about the nature of reality" (p. 74) is a high quality assumption. We
wouldn't survive long without that assumption, nor would a
metaphysics be possible.
But, we must recognize that s/o logic (the intellectual level) is deeply
and critically flawed just as classical Newtonian physics is flawed At
the bottom of physics one bumps into Heisenberg's Uncertainty
Principle where balanced dualities that are essential for s/o logic to
be meaningful cannot be observationally pinned down. At the bottom
of s/o logic, one crashes into Godel's Incompleteness Theorem
whereby a logical system cannot prove its own validity.
In other words, there's no logical reason for rational thought.
That's why I stated, in Bo's words, "the seeming impossibility in
Pirsig�s attempt to create a metaphysics out of his original Quality
idea." His original Quality idea was that it couldn't be defined, that it
was beyond intellect. As he said, "If he really wanted to do Quality a
favor he should just leave it alone. (p. 74).
Pirsig clearly recognizes that metaphysics, like all intellectual level
effort, is ultimately based on the inexpressible ,i.e., that one cannot
completely understand reality by observing and describing it (s/o
logic) but does understand it completely, like a child, simply by
being it (Quality).
Bo rescued his critique by saying, "If you accept the MOQ�s axioms
. . . " That's a big if, one that Pirsig obviously wrestled with at length.
But unlike most philosophers I'm familiar with, Pirsig is the first to
acknowledge the mystic worldview as he leaped into murky waters of
s/o logic by saying that �A �Metaphysics of Quality� is essentially a
contradiction in terms, a logical absurdity." (p. 73).
I think we should keep that in the back of our minds as we pursue
our discussions because, as Pirsig would admit (and has admitted
in an interview), the MOQ �could be wrong."
And so could I.
Anyway, it's great to have Bo, one of the original LS members, join
in this group's discussions.
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]
