From: Scott Roberts (jse885@earthlink.net)
Date: Tue Nov 30 2004 - 23:40:12 GMT
Chin,
[Scott prev:] I said that Pirsig treats
intellect negatively *with respect to DQ*, that he treats it as covering up
DQ. Both you and Pirsig seem to think that intellect's primary function is
to describe.
[Chin:]
May I ask where you get the idea Pirsig treats intellect negatively? I have been racking my brain on this as to how one could draw these conclusions. The whole idea behind MOQ seems to be based on the highest intellectual thought, as it was not built on, but fills a gap in scientific intellect as science is "Value free." In PODV, he does not deny, but is trying to support Bohr's 'Complimentary' by showing that there is no requirement of an object before testing waves and particles, as Quality fills this void.
He is quite hard on the 'Bricks and Mortar Universities' or 'Traditional Education', but also the Church, or 'Traditional Religion' as well as any philosophers who he does not agree with, and even those he does.
If you mean that he treats the mindless garbage passed off as intellect, then I would agree he does, as well as anyone who has the ability to think critically and independently.
Maybe you could define the intellect you speak of independent of the intellect he uses to build the MOQ on. Just 'Intellect' can cover a wide range. I need to know exactly what intellect you are speaking of in order to see if it is Pirsig's view, or the view of the intellectuals that is inadequate. I fear I may believe it is the view of the intellectuals that their theories are the one-and-only truths he may view negatively.
Is it mathematics, history, science, theology, or just simply academics in general?
[Scott:] Don't ignore my qualifier "with respect to DQ". Intellect, as the fourth level is, of course, superior to the other three levels, and Pirsig clearly enjoys exercising his intellect. So do we all. But then, in the hot stove example, he talks of intellectuals as perhaps being slower to get off the hot stove than mystics, and in general, he thinks of intellect as covering up DQ. Look at how apologetic he is about doing metaphysics, in view of the (supposedly) negative view mystics take about metaphysics. My view (which is heretical) is that intellect works *as* DQ/SQ interaction, that the universe that the MOQ describes as DQ and SQ is recapitulated in a limited way in our intellect. It is also not the case that the supposedly anti-metaphysical stand of mystics is universal. I would describe Plotinus, for example, as a mystic who wrote metaphysically.
- Scott
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 : Wed Dec 01 2004 - 00:14:59 GMT