Hi MFers, I don't often contribute to MF because I feel restricted by the two posts a week limitation. I prefer to shape a dialogue in real-time, not inertly listen to a lecture, which is why I prefer MD, even with its bickering.
However, Sam's "lecture" is thoughtful and full of questions and beautifully written, and I can't resist the opportunity to interject a thought or two of my own. So let's see what happens. On 10 May 2005 at 23:23, Sam Norton wrote: In ZMM the Narrator writes: "I think it's about time to return to the rebuilding of *this* American resource - individual worth. There are political reactionaries who've been saying something close to this for years. I'm not one of them, but to the extent they're talking about real individual worth and not just an excuse for giving more money to the rich, they're right. We *do* need a return to individual integrity, self-reliance and old-fashioned gumption. We really do." msh: But nowhere does he say that the happiness of an individual takes precedence over the well-being of a society. In fact, I suggest that an individual's concern for his own happiness (self-satisfaction) is biological, not social, and certainly not intellectual, as the Randians will try to argue. The only thing that takes precedence over the fixed ideas of a society is a better, more Dynamic, idea. sam: The Narrator is here giving the notion of individual worth a clear degree of Quality, ie it is a good thing, it is something which should be nurtured and affirmed. The question I'd like to explore is: where does this fit in with the MoQ? Or is it something to be left behind? msh: IMO, the question of individual worth is one that is decided in the battle between the biological and social, and is left behind once the intellectual level becomes dominant. For the fully-realized human being, a sense of his own individuality all but disappears. sam: A tension arises for me because if the characters in the novel represent the levels, and the levels are hierarchical, then to accept the MoQ would seem to imply that we should make ourselves more like Phaedrus in terms of our static patterns (which certainly seems to be the aim amongst some members of the moq.org community). Yet Pirsig, in Lila's Child, talks about his displeasure at being identified with the character Phaedrus.. msh says: I think what Pirsig the man thinks is irrelevant to the philosophy expressed in his novels. Does anyone care what the historical Shakespeare really thought about MacBeth? When we place undue emphasis on the author of a novel, rather than the novel itself, we really do run the risk of becoming what an MD regular has described as a "cult movement." So I'll skip most of the stuff about Pirsig being upset because some readers equated him with Phaedrus. pirsig via sam: "One interviewer asked me, "Are you really Phaedrus?" The answer was, "Yes I really am Phaedrus. I also really am Richard Rigel. I also really am Lila. I also really am the boat". sam via sam: In other words, the 'I' of Robert Pirsig is composed of all the different levels in greater or lesser patterns of harmony. msh: Right. We are all composed of the different levels in GREATER OR LESSER patterns of harmony. That is, some of us are dominantly biological (Lila), social (Rigel), or intellectual (Phaedrus). This doesn't man that Lila and Rigel don't have ideas, or that Phaedrus doesn't enjoy getting laid. It just means, in terms of the Metaphysics of Quality, that Phaedrus is further along the evolutionary path. He understands what Lila and Rigel are about, while they are totally baffled by him. sam: This all suggests to me that individual worth in the sense that the Narrator praises in ZMM is not to be identified with one level, but is the product of a combination. However, another strand in Pirsig's writing tends against that, and might suggest that character is a wholly third level pattern. In the foreword to the 25th anniversary edition of ZMM Pirsig comments that the Narrator is dominated by social values - and, of course, the passage from ZMM that I quoted at the beginning of this post are the words of the Narrator. msh says: Here I think Sam has nailed the dividing line between his and my own interpretation of the Metaphysics of Quality. I think Sam is suggesting that everyone is made up of more or less equal doses of biological, social, and intellectual influence, and that these three doses contribute equally to the concept of individual worth. I'm suggesting that individuals are dominated by one of the three levels, and that when an individual is dominated by the intellectual the idea of personal worth, that is that one individual is more valuable than another, fades to near nothingness. sam: Second, there is clearly a sense in which the Narrator IS dominated by social values. The Narrator's personality is one that was constructed whilst in hospital in order to satisfy the doctors that he was not insane, and was therefore at liberty to leave the hospital. And in that sense the eclipse of the Narrator is a positive development within the story. msh says: On the contrary, I think the Narrator's decision to tell the doctors what they wanted to hear, in order to get out, was an example of intellect dominating social convention. Exactly the opposite of what you suggest! So, IMO, nothing Phaedrus says in ZMM is compromised in any way. This is getting long, so I'll post now. But I think this divide in our interpretations of ZMM, between a compromised and uncompromised Narrator, is at the root of most of our differences regarding the importance of the individual in the cosmic scheme of things. Best to all, for now, Mark Steven Heyman (msh) -- InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983 Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com "Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly; Man got to sit and wonder 'why, why, why?' Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land; Man got to tell himself he understand." - Kurt Vonnegut, Cat's Cradle MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_focus/ MF Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from moq_focus follow the instructions at: http://www.moq.org/mf/subscribe.html
