From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Mon Mar 21 2005 - 03:24:34 GMT
Matt, Dan and all MOQers:
Dan was at least partially agreeing with my criticism when he prompted Matt
to defend his honor, so I should respond too.
Matt complained:
I mean, what evidence do you have that you've made an "honestly rigorous
effort at understanding" Pirsig and I haven't?
dmb says:
Like Dan, it was your "wanting to do away with RMP's pre-intellectual
experience" that "triggered" my criticism. I don't think Dan was trying to
get at your honesty so much as the fullness of your cup. And for my own
part, as I think every reader knows by now, if I thought your pants were on
fire I would not hesitate to say so.
Matt complained:
What could you possibly know about me as a philosopher, student, and person
to question my honesty and sincerity, let alone my professional integrity?
dmb says:
Like Dan, I'm only going on "what I have read in your essays and your
postings". Your question seems like an over-reaction. Is that how criticism
stikes you? Do you really feel Dan's comments constitute an attack on your
honesty, sincerity and professional integrity? I don't get that. Seems like
it would be nearly impossible to hear any kind of criticism at all if Dan's
mild manner can make you feel that bad.
Matt continued:
...Do you think I'm _lying_ when I say in "Confessions" that I was obsessed
with Pirsig long before I even knew who Rorty was? Do you really think I'm
lying when I tell you that I became obsessed with Pirsig before_ I knew
anything about philosophy, when I was a first-semester freshman taking
Philosophy 101, and that it was an obsession with _Pirsig_ that led me
around to reading other philosophy, that it was an obsession with _Pirsig_
that led me to read Rorty, the supposed person who's rotting my brain?
dmb says:
I don't get your logic here. You seem to think that guys who get obsessed
and do lots of work are somehow granted immunity from error. I mean, nobody
is saying you are lazy or ignorant or a liar here. The charge is simply that
you have the wrong idea about something. Why does this have to become a
matter of professional life and death? Why the drama. Wouldn't be easier to
simply address the actual criticism?
Matt complained:
And I think my honest effort _and_ my understanding of Pirsig is not only
displayed through my development throughout my stay at the MD (from 2001 to
the present), but in particular through the time and energy I spend in
producing evidence, fashioning arguments, developing interpretations and
merging them all together in extended essays. ...I just don't understand how
people can be so dismissive of all the work I've put in to understanding
Pirsig, and then have the nerve to call _me_ dishonest. Do you really think
I'm doing this for fun?
dmb says:
Like Dan, "that's what I'm doing it for. Fun." Why are you doing this, if
not for fun? Anyway, I don't think spending time and energy or doing lots of
work is evidence of honesty or of being correct or anything like that. It
doesn't matter if you are a tenured professor of philosophy with 100 fine
books under your belt, you can still be wrong. And yes, it is even within
the realm of possibility that Dan or I could be the one to point that out.
Matt complained:
But I think, given all available evidence, there are few people who are as
obsessed about Pirsig as I am, who are as obsessed in trying to make Pirsig
matter. I mean, do you honestly believe that I'm trying to _destroy_
Pirsig's philosophy?
dmb says:
I'm obsessed with Kate Beckinsale, but its not a metaphysical thing. But
seriously, why does it matter that you are very interested in Pirsig. Why
does it matter how you feel? I mean, a guy could be mildly interested and be
correct and a guy could be totally consumed and be wrong. Putting in the
work garantees nothing and does not constitute a defence of your position.
You know what does count? An actual defense of your position, not a
description of your dedication. Do I think you're trying to destroy the MOQ?
Do I think you intend to wreck it? No, I just think that is the effect. I
think you do not realize the meaning or central importance of the ideas and
elements you wish to extract. And I've been trying to get you to see both
how central they are and how destructive it is to remove them. Now you can
take that as a personal attack if you like. But then I would only say that
you're missing the point there too.
Matt asked if Dan thinks:
That all my efforts at criticism and then reconstruction are not an honest
effort, from my point of view, at trying to make Pirsig's philosophy
better?
dmb says:
And do you see my effort at criticism as an honest effort, from my point of
view, to prevent damage to the MOQ? There is certainly no reason for me to
think that you do.
Matt asked:
If criticism is something like negative suffering, then aren't I an integral
part of the expansion of Pirsig's philosophy? That only after engaging me
does Pirsig's philosophy become stronger? Whatever doesn't kill us will
only make us stronger?
dmb replies:
Again, I will switch roles and ask you the same thing. Why are my criticisms
of you not an integral part of the expansion of your philosophy? As you like
to say, it cuts both ways, doesn't it? I get the distinct impression that
you think my criticisms are not even worthy of a reply. Maybe that's just
because they aren't, but it could be something else.
Matt concluded:
Who knows? Maybe Rorty is a blight on the land and Pirsig's literal word
is the Way and the Truth. But how can you sit there in your computer chair
and write that I'm dishonest and insincere when the only _honest_ way of
knowing _any_ of these things is to engage with my arguments, my
interpretations, and my carefully constructed essays? Please, Dan, leave the
insults to DMB.
dmb says:
As I understand it, Pirsig would view Rorty as a blight on the land, an
intellectually paralyzed nihilist and Rorty doesn't much care for mystics or
metaphysicians either. You do the math, Einstien. Thanks, Dan, for leaving
the insults to me.
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 : Mon Mar 21 2005 - 04:32:49 GMT