You are absolutely right, 3WD, that Pirsig's form of expression is directed
partly at showing what cannot simply be said. But let's not rush in and
agree that MOQ is inconsistent just because one person (unnamed) has taken
it as his role in life to assert such inconsitencies at every possible
opportunity, pausing never to doubt his mission. His role in life is to
make us think, annoy us, and otherwise draw attention to himself. But we
shouldn't take anything he says as gospel, just as we shouldn't take
anything Pirsig says as gospel. Let's keep with the 'think this through'
program, please, remembering that what were thinking through is a
metaphysics, not Dynamic Quality.
Oh, and I'll offer a definition of metaphysics, given that Struan still
hasn't. When I'm over the 'flu.
E.P.
> From: gmbbradford@netscape.net
> Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 15:17:40 -0500
> To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> Subject: Re: RE: MD Monism
>
> 3WD,
> In a recent post you argued that Pirsig's books, being novels,
> should be evaluated differently from normative philosophical works:
>
> 3WD:
> Pirsig's books are a combination of verifiable facts and
> ingenious fiction of one "search" crafted to 'show' or 'point' to
> possible paths others might search, what pitfalls might be encountered,
> and the insights of that individual's experience. Rather than a
> philosophical treasise which 'tell' what one can or should reasonably
> think or do. And as such a rigourous application of Western logic
> evaluating "Art" as "Science" or novels as philosophical treasises will
> probably lead to fatally flawed conclusions with the risk of missing any
> potential 'good'.
>
> Pirsig does a lot more than 'point to possible' paths for further inquiry.
> In Lila, Pirsig clearly tells us how we should think and what we should
> believe. For example, he tells you that cultures are not all morally equal
> and they can be graded objectively by his system. He tells you that
> morality, quality, and value are synonomous. He tells you that Dynamic
> Quality is undefined and real. I could go on and on about things he tells
> you that read like gospel. And of course you know all that, Dave. My point
> is that Lila is far more than a novel masquerading as a self-help book.
>
> Therefore, I don't see how MOQ defies refutation by Western logic by
> claims that it is more art or fiction than metaphysics.
> Rather, I see 3WD's argument as just another way to retreat, sidestep, or
> minimize mistakes in the MOQ. But it's not the final retreat. Perhaps the
> final retreat, with tongue firmly planted in cheek, goes like this:
>
> "MOQ defies refutation by Western logic because MOQ proves that Western
> logic is flawed. Then by the new MOQ logic, 'consistency' of thought is
> de-emphasized. What's important is 'the good'. So when Pirsig claims 'A'
> somewhere in Lila and a couple chapters later claims 'B', and 'A'
> contradicts 'B', it's not such a big deal. In fact, if 'A' and 'B' are
> both independently good, then both are true. That's because the test of
> the true is the good. Consistency is one of those vestiges we still
> stubbornly cling to from SOM. It's nice when you can get it, but it's no
> longer paramount. Even Godel proved that consistency is a pipe dream, so
> why be so anal about it? Consistency is not a noun."
>
> Glenn
> __________________________________________________________________
> Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account today at
> http://webmail.netscape.com/
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:58 BST