Hello Brian,
Nice to meet you.
Am not sure if i have any insights, but let's see what we can fish for? :-)
In a message dated 6/28/01 8:35:22 PM GMT Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Subj: MD The Education System
Date: 6/28/01 8:35:22 PM GMT Daylight Time
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian Taylor)
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pirsig's former self in ZMM, Phaedrus, conducts an experiment while teaching
on getting rid of the whole degree-and-grading system. This system is
intriguing, and appears to work very well, however it exists independent of
the world, in a little vacuum, which wouldn't ever work.
Phaedrus is a fictional character.
Pirsig is not Phaedrus in a literal sense; Phaedrus is a device to whisper in
the readers' ear those things which cannot be said by the narrator of ZMM.
I think i have that about right?
However, there are autobiographical elements in ZMM.
Let's presume that we want to incorporate his idea of abolishing grades and
degrees from education so students are getting an education for purely
education's sake. With no degrees, a company will not know of any
credentials with which to discriminate prospective employees. They will
have no idea of which graduates are better than any other in a particular
field as there aren't any degrees to certify that a student has completed
some minimum requirements to show that they would be semi-proficient in
their field of study. Therefore, the company situation would have to be
revaluated as well. If companies were no longer interested solely in making
a profit, they would not be conversely solely interested in getting the best
people to do the best work for them. They would be free to hire whomever,
and although their product at the time immediately at the hire of said
person might not be at the same Quality level, the new employee would be
able to further their education in that field, and eventually help the
company with more by having both educational background and practical
experience in that field. The company and the individual would both benefit.
But in order for a company to be no longer interested in profit, the entire
issue of money itself must be dealt with. My immediate response is to
abolish the idea of money in some fashion. So that is basically the end of
my train of thought on this subject.
Phew!
I like the idea of getting shut of dosh.
Anarchists would no doubt agree with this!?
If we adopted mentoring in our educational system, pupils could be
recommended in an socio-academic context?
This goes for talented artists, musicians, actors, and all the stuff that
potentially may not, 'Pay.' But in a society without money, that would be OK,
no?
Money and mentors are both social patterns. Replace money with a damn good
mentor and as long as biological patterns are taken care of....?
Maybe that is a bit daft?
However, in Lila, Pirsig states that money and fame are integral parts of
society and of Quality as we know it. So what resolution is there to this
dilemma?
Fame = status.
If everyone had the opportunity to express themselves and explore quality
free from the shackles of serving an economic system, then hopefully everyone
would find their own level of fame within their sincerely held field of
delight?
Hey! Don't be denied!
It seems that somewhere in between ZMM and Lila there is a jump made from
Quality to Dynamic Quality. I accepted it when it was first presented, but
upon looking back and seeing how the idea of DQ has evolved, something seems
a bit off. Is all Quality Dynamic? Is it good for things to change at all?
Since DQ is the highest order of quality, anything that changes is good, no
matter what it is changing into or towards??
DQ is undifferentiated reality.
Static patterns are what you value.
Lila is a metaphysics, and therefore, as such, has to differentiate quality
into these two halves.
If you like metaphysics then Lila's MOQ has plenty of philosophy to chew on.
If you like unpatterned reality, forget the MOQ! ;)
When DQ disrupts static patterns, the change may not be for the better.
DQ will, whenever it gets the chance, try to get to work. But, too much of it
can blow your intellect haywire! (Or any static pattern.)
This confusion for me is at the root of the previous problem, as it seems
Pirsig first arrived at Quality in ZMM, then there were many transformations
and crystallisation, and then wrote Lila, after those changes had taken
place. I just sense a gap of some sort, that I haven't resolved for myself
yet.
Can anyone offer any insight?
Lila's MOQ, it seems to me, is a very good way of organising ones experiences.
One may organise ones experiences as quality events?
The bottom line is that subjects and objects are an illusion.
Reason has got us tricked into thinking in terms of a fractured and
splintered reality, when it is not.
If one has a predisposition to fracturing and splintering; differentiating
and conditioning ones experience, then fracture/splinter/differentiate and
condition in terms of quality?! :-)
Brian >>
Hope my musings help Brian?
Thanks for giving me something to think about!
Squonk.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
