From: Elizaphanian (elizaphanian@tiscali.co.uk)
Date: Sun Feb 23 2003 - 11:14:04 GMT
Hi David, everyone following,
DMB said:
> I think its only fair that we be allowed to use the word "metaphysics"
here.
> We're here to discuss the metaphysics of Quality, after all. A certain
> circle or school of anti-metaphysical philosophers may use it to refer to
"a
> nest and brood of dualisms" or "the eternal quest for ultimate absolutes"
or
> whatever, but that shouldn't prevent us from using it in the conventional
> sense, which is simply a branch of philosophy. In fact, I think its very
> uncool of Matt to use such an important word in such an unusual way. Sure,
> anyone is free to use specific and arcane meanings of words, but I think
the
> USER has the responsibility to avoid the misunderstandings that might
> result. Most obviously, providing precise definitons and explaining things
> would help alot.
I read this the other day in my 'Times Literary Supplement', in a review of
a recent book on consciousness:
"According to the official mythology of the Oxford neo-Kantians, the axis of
philosophical evil is 'Cartesianism', the traditional view that the mind is
directly acquainted only with its own subjective impressions. However, while
the neo-Kantians rightly reject this subjectivism, they retain much of
Cartesianism themselves. They may dismiss direct acquaintance with
subjective impressions, but they still demand direct acquaintance with
physical objects. From the perspective of the twentieth-century mainstream,
this seems like a throwback to the days before philosophy learned to do
without infallible foundations of any kind. The neo-Kantians have not yet
abandoned the traditional quest for some philosophical grail that will
enable thought to get outside itself and make sure that it is doing the
right thing."
The point of this quotation is that Matt is specifically NOT using the word
metaphysics "in such an unusual way" - on the contrary, his understanding of
metaphysics is the philosophical "mainstream", he - like most academic
philosophy - is learning "to do without infallible foundations of any kind".
In addition, however difficult people might find it to grasp, he has taken
pains to spell out in as clear a fashion as he can - "providing precise
definitons and explaining things".
It seems to me that this is one of the most interesting ways of approaching
Pirsig. It seems wholly commensurate with the stance of the narrator in ZMM,
and also with strong emphases in Lila (as you have acknowledged). So you
could say that the 'philosophical mainstream', which rejects a search for
foundations, is 'one and a half Pirsig', whereas the foundationalist
metaphysician is only half Pirsig (and, perhaps, 100% Phaedrus).
Sticking to language of 'theories of reality' might be helpful. As I've said
before, I think the MoQ is a high quality 'filing system for the mind'.
Perhaps we would be better off thinking of metaphysics as something
determined by small scale understandings and always provisional, rather than
something providing a large scale understanding, within which all our other
thoughts have to fit in some Procrustean fashion. As Matt puts it, there is
no 'essence' to which our understandings have to conform, and therefore no
irrefutably 'right' or 'wrong' understandings, there are only better or
worse understandings, which we have to judge for ourselves, like the
paintings in an art gallery. There is no 'philosophical grail' which will
answer all our problems - and that is the principal, mainstream point which
Matt is making - very well, IMHO.
Sam
"Only the Americans could save us from annihilation. If they do not come,
there will soon be no Muslims left in the former Yugoslavia. The Europeans
will debate until we are all dead."
(Alija Izetbegovich, then the president of Bosnia-Herzegovina, in 1993)
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 : Sun Feb 23 2003 - 12:09:37 GMT