From: Steve Peterson (peterson.steve@verizon.net)
Date: Sat Nov 08 2003 - 17:49:32 GMT
Hi Nathan,
Nathan said:
> What an interesting coincidence. We share some life experience. I taught
> high school mathematics for 30 years and retired a year ago. I, like you,
> taught perms and combs and stats. My background is math and science and more
> or less look at the world through the lense of my training.
>
Steve:
A lens for viewing the world also acts as a filter. Looking at the world
through the lens of science is part of what Pirsig is criticizing--at least
science as a value-free objective view. Pirsig spends much of ZAMM
demonstrating that values are real. The lens of science doesn't see values
because science paradoxically values being value-free. Pirsig would rather
we think of science as studying stable patterns of value.
Nathan said:
> Well Steve, I liked and thought that ZMM was profound in parts and clichéd
> in other parts and incomprehensible to me in still other parts. I agree with
> ZMM that LOGIC and REASONING will not necessarily lead anywhere, but for me
> it does point out what directions are to be avoided.
Steve:
Pirsig puts logic and reasoning within the larger context of Quality. In
other words, to say an argument is logical or reasonable is a way of
describing its value rather than its objectivity.
Nathan said:
> There are great mysteries in existence and this sense of wonder gives
> impulse to read stuff like ZMM but for me, now that I've read the thing, the
> mysteries are just as plump. ZMM hasn't yet changed my life; not even at the
> edges; .....well, maybe at the edges.
>
> I wonder if you know of the incredible work that neuroscientist are doing
> with new technology. Now there is something that leaves me breathless.
>
> Steve, you say that ZMM points out a disease that has infected society. I
> think you are talking about 'materialism'. Right? Well, materialism, the
> desire to accumulate, is a symptom of something deeper in the human psyche.
Steve:
In Lila he describes the enemy as Subject-Object Metaphysics (SOM).
Materialism is one side of the SOM coin, but here I mean materialism in the
philosophical sense rather than the economic one. Materialism is the view
that what is really real is the reality that is revealed by objective
scientific study which is basically matter and energy and cause and effect
determinism. This 'objective' reality is the primary reality (according to
SOM thinking) and mind, consciousness, ideas, values, culture, morality,
art, preferences, meanings, purposes etc. are "just subjective"--in other
words--not really real, or only in your head. In Pirsig's philosophy
objective study gets knocked down a peg. It is considered a valuable way of
studying values rather than the great revealer of objective reality.
> We are hierarchical creatures and we are hard wired to want to impress one
> another.
I don't think we are likely to find an "impress others" gene. I think such
behavior is socially learned. SOM folks want to boil everything down to
genes and chemicals and some even want to reduce the universe to molecules
and atoms. They seem to think that to really understand something we just
need to chop it up into smaller and smaller bits. What nonsense!
Pirsig wants us to think in terms of value rather than matter to understand
our experience. His philosophy is based on the postulate that the
fundamental "stuff" of existence is value or Quality rather than material or
matter.
Intellect is the process through which we recognize patterns and manipulate
abstract symbols that stand for patterns of experience. The SOMist would
agree with this definition of intellect, but Pirsig's philosophy differs
from the SOMists in that the patterns we infer are not based on physical
materials and causes and effects but instead patterns of valuation. "A
causes B" becomes "B values precondition A." None of the objective
scientific understanding of the relationship between A and B is lost, yet
much is gained, because we now have a place for art, culture, morality,
values, etc., and we can now discuss and study these patterns as well as
forces and chemicals and genes because we don't need to view values as
second-class "only in your head" "just subjective" entities. They are as
real as rocks and trees which are also now viewed as patterns of value.
It's all Value! Quality. Does that make sense?
> I am pleased to have this dialogue with you.
Likewise. I tried to give you my brief explanation of Pirsig's philosophy
above. I hope it helps.
Regards,
Steve
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 : Sat Nov 08 2003 - 17:49:40 GMT