[MD] Essentials for target practice

[MarshaV]

Greeting Ham,


On Jun 29, 2010, at 3:20 AM, Ham Priday wrote:

> Dear Marsha --
> 
> 
>> Ham
>> 
>> I want you to always have a home on the MD.  Your
>> contributions are very important to me.  I wish I could
>> easily translate your 12-point manifesto into MoQ language.
> 
> Thanks for the encouraging sentiment.  It's very sweet of you, Marsha. Although I appreciate the thought, I didn't expect my fundamentals to be translatable into MoQ language.  Since they represent an alternative view, I wanted them to be considered on their own merit, and was curious to learn who would accept them on that basis.

While reading your 12-point manifesto I stopped at each point with multiple questions that you were not there to answer.  With the meaning of many words I wonder if they mean the same for you as for me:  I doubt it,  but maybe,  hmmm,  I don't know.  -  I am much too much the relativist to trust that we speak the same language.  I mentioned before that many times your writing seems to represent in its essence things that I might agree with, if I could clearly know what you meant.  -  The switch from primary source to uncreated source, for instance, seems to be a movement in the right direction.   For certain, your participation on this list stirs my teacup and often helps me reconsider important neglected points.   


> 
> But the longer I dwell in Qualityland, the more I realize that philosophers -- especially those who are revered as cultural icons -- are prone to having their work 'dogmatized' by their acolytes.  I've suggested before (and I don't mean it to be disparaging) that the MoQ evolved as a cultist movement appealing mostly to elitists and liberal arts majors seeking a New Age replacement for religion and scientific objectivism.  I think Pirsig envisioned himself as a latter-day Pied Piper who would lead the Flower Children out of authoritarian enslavement into a romantic era of aesthetic appreciation.

In this present day culture, what would be the least disparaging label for people who care?  The words you've chosen have rather a negative, comical connotation?  No matter what, the participants on this list seek the good.   What further justification is required?   In this gymnasium we wrestle with ideas and prepare for the next leap.    


> The novels alone seduce the reader with analogies and metaphors that preach collectivism with Quality as its credo.  The philosophy fits right into the the egalitarian and "greening" movements of recent decades, while slighting individualism and free-market capitalism as either "egoistic" or outworn, greed-based ideologies dominated by the "social level".  Now there's nothing wrong in having a liberal persuasion; indeed, it's the prevailing view of authors and journalists in our time.  It becomes problematic, however, when a philosopher weaves his thesis so as to promote his brand of "social reform".  Is the resulting product then a philosophy or a social polemic? And, if it's the latter, why does he call it a "metaphysics"?

Metaphysics because it inspires and offers an alternative approach to consider Reality.  


> The Lila passage you've recently quoted is an example of what I'm talking about:
> 
> "While sustaining biological and social patterns
> Kill all intellectual patterns.
> Kill them completely
> And then follow Dynamic Quality
> And morality will be served."

This little aphorism just grows in its beauty.  As much as Lila's soliloquy speaks of the conventional truth, this poems points to the Ultimate Truth.  


> This startling declaration comes at the end of Phaedrus's journey when he loses Lila to Rigel, and it paraphrases a Buddhist poem that likens nirvana to being "completely dead."  He blames his lover's obstinate behavior on "the static patterns that were really going to kill her if she didn't let go."  But if biological and social patterns represented Lila's depressed life style, why kill the very patterns that might save her?  Without intellect, Phaedrus himself would never have arrived at the philosophy he's espousing.  It's a dramatic flourish that sounds profound in a romance novel, but it undermines the highest quality "static patterns" in Pirsig's hierarchy.

I do not believe it undermines the "highest quality "static patterns"", but refreshes and clarifies ones understanding of their value.  


> Yet, passages like the above are doggedly sought out and requoted as gems of wisdom for the practicing MoQist -- if only they can comprehend the meaning of it.  That's why novels and poetry are not well suited to articulating philosophy.  It's also why, after five years, the game of "Pirsig says" has lost its appeal to me.


Such passages are gems of wisdom for the brave.  Meditation on Emptiness is for the brave.  Meditation on the Unpatterned is for the brave.  Words as patterns, even intellectual patterns, are a poor substitute for what can be reached, even if you just stick your toe in the Ocean.     


Love you,

   Marsha

 
___