From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sun Oct 12 2003 - 21:37:02 BST
Matt and all MOQers:
In spite of my disagreements, I'd like to thank Matt for his efforts here.
I've picked just a few passages, the ones that, I think, are most central to
your misreading of Pirsig. The first passage includes the word "mysticism".
I believe its the only time the word appears in your ten-thousand word essay
and that's the heart of the problem...
Matt wrote in Part One:
The stark refusal to enter the arena, to take the "easy escape of mysticism"
(which I would argue is not the only way to refuse entrance), would count as
a large circumvention, a significant begging of the question, a call for
explication.
dmb says:
The easy escape of mysticism? If your blunder can be pin-pointed, this is
it. DQ is what lies between the horns of the dilemma. DQ is the
pre-intellectual reality, the primary reality, and "when DQ is associated
with religious mysticism it produces an avalanche of information as to what
DQ is". One could make a case that Pirsig is a Buddha-seeker and that
mysticism is central to his whole case. And what do you make of that? You
call it an easy escape, a circumvention and a begging of the question.
Without going into lots of detail, I'd simply assert that you've completely
missed the point and that its is a blunder of epic proportions to read
Pirsig's mysticism as a language game. This is not so much a "strong
misreading" as is it a muscular misunderstanding. :-) Here is another
passage where DQ is misread...
Matt wrote in Part Three:
Pirsig calls Dynamic Quality the "pre-intellectual cutting edge of reality."
(p. 133, Ch. 9, Lila) For Pirsig, "Static quality ... emerges in the wake
of Dynamic Quality." (ibid.) One way we can interpret this is that Dynamic
Quality represents our intuition, our access to the nonrational, our access
to Quality. It gives us our moral intuitions, which take the form of static
quality patterns. Static quality patterns are what is left over and these
are arguable. These represent our patterns of argument over the years that
have accumulated, arguments for democracy and freedom. But
unlike Rorty who says that we can never reach outside of the cicle of these
static patterns, Pirsig says that the argument begins and ends with Dynamic
Quality.
dmb says:
DQ represents our intuition? Beyond the problem that this waters down
mysticism to the point that it becomes mere sentimentality, there is also
the problem that the very next sentence says our intuitions "take the form
of static quality patterns". This seems to turn all our thoughts, beliefs,
ideas, moral codes and all the other static forms into intuition as well.
Putting the two together gives us, "Dq=intuition=sq, so that DQ=sq. Um. You
might want to work some equations through using symbolic logic. But
seriously, the confusion in all that seems to lead to the conclusison that
Pirsig's argument begins and ends with DQ, especially when it comes to
addressing the problem of the NAZIs....
Matt wrote in Part Three:
"The sense of harmony of the cosmos" is Dynamic Quality, intuition, and this
sense "makes us choose the facts most fitting to contribute to this
harmony." It _makes_ us, it _forces_ us, it _compels_ us. This is what
forces the Nazi to play our game, a game in which the Nazi has no chance of
winning. The force is our intuition of Dynamic Quality, a capacity that
every person has, that every person has a moral obligation to follow. If
the Nazi denies it, then we should feel righteous in saying that he is
subordinating Dynamic Quality to immoral static patterns. The Nazi is
immoral because he denies Dynamic Quality.
dmb says:
No, the Nazi is immoral becasue he asserts 3rd level static values over 4th
level static values. DQ has nothing to do with it. Again, without going into
detail, I'd simply assert that you've missed the point by a mile. The MOQ
prevents the NAZI from co-option by identifyig them and other reactionary
movements as the assertion of social levels values in a larger struggle. It
fixes the NAZIs at a certain level in evolution and contrast that with the
higher level. I should add that I did wrote my History thesis about Hitler
and Pirsig's insights are supported by everything I know about it. It
explains things about fascism and related movements that otherwise seems to
defy explanation. I mean, its not just a matter of intuition or cultural
bias. The same kind of reactionary impulse can be seen in many cultures
beyond Germany or America - and that same key insight does a great deal to
explain less dramatic political and cultural conflicts too. In other words,
its rational, it corresponds to our experiences and it works.
I suppose it just looks like I'm picking on Matt, but this is not my
intention. Its just that I sincerely think Pirsig and Rorty don't mix. They
are so far apart that thinking about one in terms of the other seems wildly
inappropriate. Its such a mismatch that one is likely to conclude that "the
NAZI is immoral because he denies DQ" or other, equally ridiculous,
conclusions. Mysticism is not just a refusal to enter the arena. Pirsig is
playing a language game in his assertions about mysticism. The MOQ doesn't
make any sense when its read that way. To equate DQ with "a compliment we
pay after the fact", our moral intuitions or assumptions or any other static
thing. I sincerely hope that this argument does not cause you to put up a
wall of defense or to shrug, but that it causes you to be buried in that
avalanche. I honestly believe that the MOQ can be rightly understood only
when DQ is understood to be the mystical reality. Yes, I know. There is room
for a variety of interpretations. But that doesn't mean there is no such
thing as an incorrect interpretation. I think any interpretation of the MOQ
that dismisses or excludes mysticism is simply not correct.
Thanks,
dmb
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 Oct 12 2003 - 21:59:06 BST