MD Quality decisions

From: Rudy (rudy_o_2000@yahoo.com)
Date: Sat Jan 04 2003 - 02:23:27 GMT

  • Next message: David Buchanan: "RE: MD Pirsig a liberal?"

    Over the holidays I had some spare time on my hands,
    so my own "Quality decision" was to re-read Pirsig a
    bit and to ponder some more of the discussions on this
    list. I also revisited the rhetorical questions that
    I posed last month regarding the relevance of your
    ruminations. When I composed those questions, I didn't
    fully appreciate certain things. I.e., many or most
    of the participants on this list are philosophers,
    whether by profession or training or interest. Like
    theoretical particle physicists, philosophers are
    entitled to their abstractions. They do their work
    using language not necessarily accessible to the
    average educated person. Philosophers aren't
    responsible for increasing the rate of growth of the
    GNP or designing a car that gets 100 miles per gallon
    or helping individuals to resolve their past emotional
    traumas; they think about the workings of the mind and
    try to help humankind realize the various ways that it
    perceives and thinks about things, and why it's
    important for people to know how they think about
    things (and maybe why it's important to think about
    things that haven't yet been thought about). In
    effect, they work for no one, and yet they work for
    all fields of intellectual endeavor; they strive to
    understand and improve the process of analysis,
    reflection and critical reasoning such that
    scientists, doctors, lawyers, teachers, therapists,
    political leaders, ministers, artists, writers and
    every enlightened person of good will may come to use
    the facility of the mind and the heritage of language
    to greater effect. Not a bad thing, admittedly.

    Pirsig analyzes the world of academic philosophy by
    comparing it with philosophology (Lila, Chapt. 26),
    and concludes that most academians urge their students
    into philosophical appreciation and not into the act
    of philosophizing. And maybe that's not such a bad
    thing. There's no shortage of great philosophical
    thought out there, and knowing such thought should
    help students to live more enlightened lives (well,
    many of them, anyway) even if they never get around to
    mapping out their own world views.

    As Pirsig says, statics and dynamics have a yin-yang
    relationship; the dynamic needs the static framework
    to latch on to, or it otherwise may be lost. The
    dynamic of great philosophy needs the static academic
    world of philosophology in order to be memorialized,
    just as the great spiritual figures such as Moses,
    Jesus, Mohammed and the Buddha need the temples,
    churches and mosques, with their fixed doctrines and
    rituals, in order to be remembered. And in that
    light, one can see what the MD list is becoming: the
    Temple of Pirsig Philosophology. (I would imagine that
    some of you old-timers on this list are yawning at
    this point; ho-hum, another newbie is having the
    scales fall from his eyes).

    I agree that Pirsig probably deserves such a Temple;
    as Martha Stewart says, it's a good thing. It's all
    good. I'm glad that you're doing this. But let me
    just take a moment to tell you where I'm coming from.
    I was one of the many people who were entirely
    captivated by Zen and the Art back in the 80s. Mr.
    Pirsig seemed to lend hope that our lives of quiet
    desperation did in fact have meaning after all. He
    told us in ZAMM that he's a smart fellow (170 IQ), and
    backed himself up with all sorts of interesting facts
    and complicated insights. And yet, he brought it all
    down to simple acts like tightening handlebars with
    shims made of aluminum beer can stock, or trying to be
    patient with his son. He presented himself as an
    average member of post-industrial society, a technical
    writer raising a family in an assumedly
    run-of-the-mill suburban town. And yet, he was able
    to use his prodigious learning and intellectual
    talents to find meaning and hope in his
    then-quite-average circumstances. He didn't do it
    with touchy-feely psychology or free-floating New Age
    presumptions or moldy religious piety or mystical
    pretensions. His reflective toolkit contained Western
    Technology and Eastern Wisdom and Classical Learning,
    while his motorcycle toolkit held WD-40 and socket
    wrenches and screwdrivers of various sorts. It was
    such a wonderful balance of tangibles and
    abstractions, experience and reflection (and subjects
    and objects? Yes, for sure, but in an inter-related
    sort of way). Holistic, as they used to say. I
    didn't quite agree that "Quality" was the right word
    for what Pirsig was reaching for, but it didn't really
    matter. I knew what he was doing: in Lila terms, he
    broke through the static constructs that threaten to
    choke us and put some dynamic back into our lives.
    The motorcycle roaring along a two-lane blacktop up in
    the high country was the perfect metaphor for it all.

    So here we are, two decades later. And guess what? The
    need for a ZAMM experience seems greater than ever.
    So I took to the Internet looking for a place where
    the spirit of ZAMM still burns bright, where the
    dynamic continues into the present, where the journey
    is still on, where sensitive and intelligent people
    continue to combine critical thought with daily life
    experience. A place where folks discuss "Zen"
    (actually, more like "Tao", or really an overall
    combination of great thought) along side the art of
    writing industrial safety regulations, or the art of
    raising children, or the art of deciding who to
    support in the next presidential election, or the art
    of protecting personal freedoms in an era of homeland
    security, or the art of developing low-income urban
    housing, etc. You get my drift. And, for better or
    worse, I found moq.org.

    From what I've been able to learn, it appears that Mr.
    Pirsig left behind the "avatar of everyday life"
    approach of ZAMM and used his fame to climb the ladder
    of philosophical abstraction. Hey, what can I say to
    that? He took a long shot with ZAMM and it came in.
    He then used his fame and fortune to follow his bliss,
    which he found more within the realm of abstract
    thought and less within his toolbox of wrenches and
    voltmeters. He thus wrote Lila, which appears to offer
    a set of abstract intellectual tools offered in good
    faith for use by anyone interested in making their own
    ZAMM journey. But Lila doesn't continue the journey,
    at least not in a tangible, emotionally accessible
    manner. Lila is the start of the static latching
    process relative to the dynamic created in ZAMM. And
    this discussion list appears to be a further step in
    that process.

    I gather that many of you are teachers, some are grad
    students, others just interested in philosophy. I hear
    you talk about Richard Rorty, who, from what little I
    know, is another "bad boy" of the philosophy circuit.
    That says to me that you're a bunch of philosophy
    people who experience some discomfort with the overly
    static, overly philosophologal nature of the academic
    institution, an institution so static that it cannot
    find room for Pirsig despite the fact that he has
    clearly influenced modern American thinking. For now,
    the universities won't philosophologalize Pirsig, so
    you are taking on the task. Perhaps some day, once
    you've held a few conferences and had some papers and
    books published from them, the universities will feel
    a bit more comfortable in adopting the work that you
    are now doing. Again, that's not a bad thing.

    By comparison, I'm looking for something a bit more
    feelings-conscious, given that Pirsig himself once
    admitted to feelings, e.g. his emotional engagement
    with his (late) son and with the world he found along
    the back roads of Montana and Idaho (and the ZAMM
    postscript with the keyboard doodlings of his
    daughter). In Lila, by contrast, there is no Pirsig
    at all, only a fictional alter-ego, Phraedus, who
    scarcely admits to any feelings (a philosopher's
    dream: leave the affective world and all its chaos to
    the psychologists and to the women folk, e.g. Lila).
    On the other hand, I sympathize with Pirsig's
    intellectual distrust of emotional volatility and
    understand his use of a "classic-romantic" fencing in
    ZAMM to help keep emotional matters under control.
    Obviously, with emotions filtered out of Lila, he had
    the luxury of abandoning this rather SOM-oriented
    dichotomy (i.e., the "subject" of the intellectual
    facility versus the "objective" emotional-hormonal
    animal). But back in the messy everyday world where
    people do get hot and bothered, basic SOM is sometimes
    necessary for survival. As some of you "listers" told
    me, and I believe Pirsig says as much in Lila, SOM is
    not to be entirely disposed of, but is instead to be
    reflected upon and transcended as circumstances allow.

    Also, I'm looking for a dynamic where Pirsig's ideas
    themselves can be criticized and challenged. (Little
    thing: in Chapter One of Lila, "Get Down Tonight" is
    not the voice of the black ghetto, as the song was
    written and sung by white men. Big thing: I agree that
    the "biological" evolved from the "inorganic" and
    represents something "higher", but I have trouble with
    the extension of the paradigm such that the
    intellectual is ranked above the social; it seems to
    me you have some chickens and eggs going on there, at
    least for we homo sapiens, who can detect mixed-up
    metaphors and yet still get the point). I don't see
    very many Pirsig critiques on this list (although
    admittedly, there is occasional "heresy"); ZAMM is at
    times passed off as an early stage of Pirsigism, but
    Lila is usually quoted reverentially and
    unquestioningly, just as the Bible is used in the
    major Christian academies. But then again, if the
    main purpose here is to philosophologalize Pirsig so
    as to challenge an even colder and more static
    institution, then I can understand and even agree why
    no one takes the time to challenge the master.
    Perhaps you've got an even bigger Buddha to turn into
    road-kill here. (PLEASE NOTE: I'm only using a stupid
    metaphor here, and am not in any way advocating
    violence :^)

    Now that I better understand and sympathize with the
    MD, I hope you better understand what I was looking
    for. So, philosophize and philosophologalize on, and I
    wish you best of luck in your quest to change the
    learning institutions for the better. If that's the
    practical application of the MD, then live long and
    prosper, academic brujos that you are.

    Rudy

    __________________________________________________
    Do you Yahoo!?
    Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
    http://mailplus.yahoo.com

    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 : Sat Jan 04 2003 - 02:23:39 GMT