Re: MD Pirsig's conception of ritual

From: Elizaphanian (elizaphanian@tiscali.co.uk)
Date: Sun Feb 09 2003 - 09:41:12 GMT

  • Next message: Elizaphanian: "Re: MD NAZIs and Pragmatism"

    Hi David, Jon, all,

    > Tag. You're it.

    OK, I'll do all the work.

    Jon pointed out that ritual underlay Pirsig's eventual admiration for the
    Sophists (in ZMM). Whilst I think there is definitely something in this, I
    think it would be best to hold off on that point for the time being, not
    least because it is the source of much disagreement. Let's stick to what is
    outlined in Lila, but make that point the first one to address once we (if
    we) gain some measure of agreement about the Lila account. It's certainly an
    aspect that I'm *very* interested in.

    David's first reactions:

    > 1. Ritual is the static latch of the social level; it functions to
    preserve
    > dynamic breakthroughs.
    >
    > DMB says: Right, but its a little more complicated than that. In chapter
    30
    > Pirsig spends some time discussing the relationship between static and
    > Dynamic Quality where ritual is concerned and he points out some
    differences
    > between East and West and between different periods. Sometimes static
    > rituals properly encase DQ and sometimes "these interpretations become
    like
    > golden vines that cling to a tree, shut out its sunlight and eventally
    > strangle it."

    So how to rephrase element 1 in the light of this reaction? How about
    1. Ritual is the static latch of the social level; it functions to preserve
    dynamic breakthroughs. As with all static latches there is the potential for
    ritual to inhibit further dynamic developments.

    > 2. Ritual preserves a particular society in existence. It contains and
    > reproduces those patterns of behaviour which maintain that society above
    the
    > biological level, and which give that society its own identity. This has
    > maintained human societies in existence for at least tens of thousands of
    > years.
    >
    > DMB says: Right, but its important to remember that often Pirsig is using
    > the word more broadly than is usually expected. Its not just the religious
    > rituals of the churches that create and preserve the social order. He
    > includes Monday mornings at work, payday, grocery shopping and a huge
    range
    > of other such "rituals".

    How to rephrase element 2 in the light of this reaction? How about
    2. Ritual preserves a particular society in existence. It contains and
    reproduces those patterns of behaviour (including but not limited to
    washing, putting up a house, hunting, eating and song or dance rituals
    relating to "religion") which maintain that society above the biological
    level, and which give that society its own identity. This has maintained
    human societies in existence for at least tens of thousands of years.

    > 3. Ritual is the source of the intellectual level. Intellectual principles
    > are derived from reflection on ritual practices.
    >
    > DMB says: Again, I think this needs to be more precise. And I think this
    > gets at a very important issue; the connection between the social and
    > intellectual levels. He says, "The mythos is the social culture and
    rhetoric
    > which the culture must invent before philosophy becomes possible. ...it is
    > the PARENT of our modern scientific talk. This 'mythos over logos' thesis
    > agreed with the MOQ's assertion that intellectual static patterns of
    quality
    > are built up out of social static patterns of quality." This is consistent
    > with the point he makes with respect to Descrates, where he should have
    said
    > that "17th century French culture exists, therefore I think, therefore I
    > am". He not exactly saying that intellectual principle come from the
    > contemplation of rituals, but that the mythos, which includes rituals in a
    > big way, is what allows us to think at all. Language is also a key feature
    > of the social level. Imagine trying to do philosophy or science without
    > first having a language. Its impossible to even imagine how it would be
    > possible, no?

    How to rephrase element 3 in the light of this reaction? It is unclear to me
    how to include the point about language (which I agree with) without turning
    this into 'Pirsig's conception of the social level'. Are you saying that
    language is essential to ritual? If so I wouldn't agree - I didn't see
    anywhere that Pirsig says this, but if he does, the point will have to be
    rephrased to include it. You say, "He not exactly saying that intellectual
    principle come from the contemplation of rituals, but that the mythos, which
    includes rituals in a big way, is what allows us to think at all", and
    certainly 'reflection on' was my wording. But the source for this was
    Pirsig's "From these the first intellectual truths could have been
    derived.... principles emerge from ritual." I am unclear how an intellectual
    truth or principle can be derived from ritual without some preceding element
    of reflection or contemplation. But I could be wrong about that. How about
    3. Ritual is the parent of the intellectual level. Intellectual principles
    are derived from [reflection on] ritual practices.

    > 4. Religious rituals enable social-pattern dominated people to progress to
    a
    > higher level of awareness. Freedom from the social level comes from
    mastery
    > of those rituals, not their rejection (ie 'putting them to sleep').
    >
    > DMB says: I think you've got two distinct ideas here. The first one, I
    > think, is about the role of ritualistic religion in the modern West.
    > Intellectuals tend to view such things as ignorant and backward and so
    they
    > are unmoved by the mass and things like that. But for people whose
    worldview
    > is still dominated by social values, by the mythos of their culture,
    ritual
    > can serve as a sign post pointing to DQ. I guess its fair to call this a
    > "higher level of awareness", but I think its important not to confuse this
    > kind of transcendence with moving up to the next static level. In other
    > words, these religious rituals are supposed to point to and reveal
    > unpatterned DQ, not intellectual static patterns. The second idea, that
    > freedom comes from the mastery of ritual, is where the difference between
    > East and West really comes into play. It is the Zen monk who can best find
    > the Dynamic within the static patterns because "unlike the Greeks, the
    > Hindus in their many thousands of years of cultural evolution had paid
    > enormous attention to the conflict between ritual and freedom. Their
    > resolution of this conflict in the Buddhist and Vedantist philosophies is
    > one of the profound achievments of the human mind." In the West such
    issues
    > never really made it to the level of a philosophy and remained a social
    > level mythos sort of thing. In the West both ritualistic religion and
    > scientific objectivity have all but blinded us to DQ. So the conflict was
    > not resolved properly at all. Pirsig speaks to this in chapter 30 by
    > pointing out that SOM can't see the difference between mysticism and
    > insanity, etc..

    How to rephrase element 4 in the light of this reaction? I think you make a
    good point that there are two distinct ideas here, so let's split them.
    However I think your comments about 'modern West' are importations of your
    own concerns (possibly to fend off what you thought was my axe-grinding?).
    In particular you seem to argue that this element of ritual freeing people
    to go higher is only for the West, whereas my reading of Pirsig is that he
    is interpreting the East here - as your later quotes support. (I'm not
    denying that Pirsig claims the West is inferior to the East in this
    respect). So how about:

    4a. Religious rituals, properly understood, enable socially
    pattern-dominated people to see Dynamic Quality.

    and

    4b. Freedom from social level static patterns (ritual?) comes from mastery
    of those patterns (ie 'putting them to sleep'), not from replacing one
    static set with another static set.

    > 5. This resolves the paradox of ritual and freedom, for both reflect
    dharma
    > - Quality.
    >
    > DMB says: OK. Both ritual and freedom reflect dharma, but so does
    everything
    > in the universe, so I'm not sure how useful the assertion really is.
    "Dharma
    > is beyond all questions of what is internal and what is external. Dharma
    is
    > Quality itself, the principle of 'rightness' which gives structure and
    > purpose of all life and to the evolving understasnding of the universe
    which
    > life has created." It is very much tied up with the original idea of
    "Rta",
    > the cosmic order of things. Its the oldest idea in the world, that the
    > physical order and the moral order of the universe is the same thing. "But
    > within modern Buddhist thought DHARMA becomes the phenomenal world - the
    > object of perception, thought or understanding." This is a rich enough
    vein
    > that we could spend lots of time on this single issue.

    I agree that this element is not particularly useful, so let's drop it
    (although it will be worth coming back to it at a later point). So where
    have we go to? With a little bit of rearrangement, a new summary of
    'Pirsig's conception of ritual':

    1. Ritual is the static latch of the social level; it functions to preserve
    dynamic breakthroughs. As with all static latches there is the potential for
    ritual to inhibit further dynamic developments.
    2. Ritual preserves a particular society in existence. It contains and
    reproduces those patterns of behaviour (including but not limited to
    washing, putting up a house, hunting, eating and song or dance rituals
    relating to "religion") which maintain that society above the biological
    level, and which give that society its own identity. This has maintained
    human societies in existence for at least tens of thousands of years.
    3. Freedom from social level static patterns comes from mastery of those
    patterns (ie 'putting them to sleep'), not from replacing one static set
    with another static set.
    4. Ritual is the parent of the intellectual level. Intellectual principles
    are derived from ritual practices.
    5. Religious rituals, properly understood, enable socially pattern-dominated
    people to see Dynamic Quality.

    You're it!

    Sam

    "A good objection helps one forward, a shallow objection, even if it is
    valid, is wearisome." Wittgenstein

    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 : Sun Feb 09 2003 - 09:50:52 GMT