Hi Everyone:
Since I brought up the Leuchter case I feel obligated to wrap it up with some
observations about the various responses that the case elicited from the
group.
I think it�s fair to say that most agreed that the MoQ isn�t much help in
assessing in advance who are the good guys among the contrarians,
revolutionaries and degenerates. Nor should we be surprised at this. Pirsig
admits in his SODV paper that we can�t expect to find complete uniformity
when it comes to value judgments because of each person�s unique history.
Everyone agrees that quality exists, but no two people will agree on exactly
what it is or who or what embodies it. In that sense at least, quality is
relative.
In the responses to the questions, several ideas jumped out that I found
especially interesting.
ROGER:
In my job, one of my bosses shared a great way to view other opinions ...
especially when contradictory to my own beliefs or seemingly absurd. He
said to ask yourself a question ... �How could a reasonably educated adult
come to that conclusion?� This puts an active burden on the listener to find
the value in every view.
This is similar to an exercise I once participated in where a group was asked
to give their opinion about something, but before you could give your opinion
you had first to say something good about the previous speaker�s opinion. It
certainly helped to foster a spirit of cooperation.
JACK:
My understanding of Pirsig�s idea of quality is a continuum - from low to high.
I might argue that someone making an intellectual statement about a period
of history has low to high quality depending on their credentials, experience,
etc. I�m skeptical of Mr. Leuchter�s. However, I believe this woman�s
experiences have high quality in that she�s actually lived through the time
that Mr. Leuchter is merely hypothesizing about.
Jack reminds us that the MoQ presents two hi/lo scales�the moral levels
and a value scale within levels. Pirsig rarely says something is bad. Rather,
it has low quality. Similarly, Pirsig won�t come out and say something is evil.
Rather it�s a lower level trying to devour a higher one. I�m not sure what�s
significant about this, but I think maybe it has something to do with the
possible development of a way to measure quality with more precision than
is now possible. Keep in mind that science has been a success because of
precise measurements, and scientists will voice their belief in a theory on
hi/lo confidence scale. (Of course, all men know what a 10 is.) There�s no
quality meter available yet for the MoQ, but the idea, even if ludicrous,
strikes my fancy.
JOHN B:
But he (Adam Crane) discriminates between two modes of thought, one of
which is an image-making process based on memory, the other linked to a
�healthy, common sense, wiser intelligence.� The link with Krishnamurti, via
David Bohm, who was a friend of Crane�s, is strong. So the issue becomes,
how does anyone judge �reality�? Are we all so locked into our little self
created worlds that we can only talk past each other when it comes to what
is, even if that includes quality? . . . This is a fundamental issue.
Indeed it is, John. This forum is an excellent playing field where one watching
the action from the bleachers can readily see that each player wears, using
Pirsig�s image, his own set of intellectual glasses through which he views
�reality� and interprets the MoQ in large part to protect his preconceived world
view. Your proposal (if I understand correctly) is that there may exist a
�floating� intelligence beyond our individual and collective minds that we
might be able to tap into if only we would recognize its existence and paid
attention to it. This would open us to more dynamic experiences and free us
to some extent from our cultural limitations and insulated experiences.
The idea intrigues me. I�ve often thought that the brain, being simply an
extension of the nervous system, is no different than other bodily organs
(such as the stomach and lungs) in that it converts exterior �energies� (for
want of a better term) to serve the body�s purposes. Then the whole idea of a
mathematical universe suggests some sort of exterior intelligence as does
the creative power of Pirsig�s Dynamic Quality. And when I see physicists
such as Robert Penrose state without reservation their belief in the existence
of Plato�s ideal forms, I become very open to the ideas of Krishnamurti and
Bohm that John describes.
Such are my rambling thoughts on what�s left of the Leuchter case. Many
thanks to all who responded.
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]
