From: Dan Glover (daneglover@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri Nov 15 2002 - 06:09:07 GMT
Hello everyone
>From: Matt the Enraged Endorphin <mpkundert@students.wisc.edu>
>Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>Subject: Re: MD Individuality
>Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 22:49:53 -0600
>
>Dan:
>Mr. Pirsig has said it and I too get the feeling that people in general
>won't appreciate what he's saying in Lila nor will there be a general
>appreciation of that work for another 50 or 100 years. If you mean changing
>his MOQ to suit our own understanding, I really don't think he'd be all
>that delighted.
>
>Matt:
>I wrote to somebody recently about Pirsig. He'd recently decided to start
>philosophy in college because of reading Lila. I warned him about trying
>to bring a Pirsigian agenda into the contemporary undergrad scene. During
>that warning I said this:
>
>"I've gone through many stages in my philosophical development and I've
>picked up a few things. For one, Pirsig talks about how he's being ignored
>by the philosophical establishment. This is something you will hear all
>the time on moq.org. The reason, I've come to believe, is not why he says
>it is. Pirsig and most moqers believe that Pirsig is too far ahead of his
>time. Not so. A better placement of Pirsig would be in the 18th century.
>That's why Pirsig is ignored. Because he read some really old philosophy,
>stopped, said a few interesting things about it, and then created a
>philosophical system that's antiquated before it even hit the paper.
>
>"Now, that's a little harsher then maybe Pirsig deserves, but my advice is
>to not take Pirsig at his word all the time. When he says in ZMM that he's
>a bad scholar, believe him. When he says that Quality is revolutionary,
>you might want to pause and do a little research. Don't get me wrong. I
>got hooked into philosophy by Pirsig. I still greatly admire him. But I
>admire him now for tapping into a general feeling that was flowing through
>the US. A lot of the points he has are still valid. But (and you'll find
>me saying this starting back in July in the "Confessions" thread, in case
>you want to go archive digging) I think Pirsig is best viewed as a culture
>critic, rather than as a metaphysician. I would recommend my posts (and
>the replies they received) for a good contrast to the way Pirsig and some
>on moq.org may want him to be viewed and the way I think he is best
>viewed."
>
>Now, that is pretty harsh. My point is, contra Pirsig, I think his
>philosophy is better understood as a throwback to the 18th C., rather than
>as before its time. But I still think it has a lot of worth and impact for
>us. That's why I predict that Pirsig will be remembered, but for his
>criticisms and insights about culture, rather than for his systematic
>philosophy.
Hi Matt!
I don't think you're being harsh at all. Robert Pirsig himself admits the
MOQ is nothing new. I also tend to agree with you on how RMP will be
remembered though it seems to me his insights about culture are
preconditioned by his systematic philosophy. I don't believe it is so much a
matter of RMP being ahead of his time as it is a matter of something else,
something hard to put one's finger on exactly. Like Van Gogh's paintings,
maybe some things aren't appreciated by the generation they belong to,
though the success of ZMM would seem to contradict that. Like I said, it's
hard to put a finger on it exactly...
Thanks for your thoughts
Dan
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
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 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 15 2002 - 06:10:06 GMT