Hi,
Whilst looking at mysticism in Pirsig, I reviewed the part early in Lila
where he chooses not to go down the mystical path, and instead write a
metaphysics. Two things:
- the first is that he is clear that writing a metaphysics is a degenerate
activity. Another way of putting that is to say that any metaphysics that is
created will inevitably be flawed, or, in parallel with Godel's theorem, if
you've got something which is beautifully logically consistent it will be
incomplete, or if it (claims to be) complete, it will be inconsistent. It's
not open to us to be right about everything (that's why mystics leave
perfection to God).
- the second is that he indulges in writing a metaphysics because it's fun.
(I would also say that it can be practically useful - just as mathematics
can be useful even when it is imperfect).
As this is a forum dedicated to following the metaphysics that was begun on
these principles, could we not bear those two things in mind - and if things
become too serious, too heated and not 'fun' enough, perhaps we could
remember the first of Pirsig's points?
In hope.
Sam
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
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 - 16:02:00 BST