[MD] Pressed Ham

[Ham Priday]

David --

In reply to my request for examples of the MOQ dealing with "real world
problems," you said:

> An example or two? Sure Check out Henry Gurr's website.
> As I recall, he found about 2000 such sites with substantial
> reference to Pirsig's work and his has links to about 200 of
> those. The range of applications is really quite astonishing.
> But the problems associated with SOM and the solutions
> that entail philosophical mysticism are aimed at problems
> in the world of ideas.

I did.  Not only does Prof. Gurr compile a list of MOQ-related websites, he
encourages their construction by offering web creation instructions and free
site-linking privileges.  Yes, he has found that required reading of ZMM
improves student learning in a majority of cases, and is generally
enthusiastic about Pirsig the man and his philosophy.

Yesterday I mentioned this to my friend Scot, a recently retired professor
of Bio-chemistry, also in South Carolina.  Scot disclosed to me that he
learned early on that students were more attentive, and more "willing" to
learn, when he related the textbook material to principles outside the field
of chemisty.  An insatiable history reader with an acquired knowledge of
economics, Scot made it a practice to inject precepts and analogies
of his own into the lecture subjects, often with a bit of whimsy, and it
paid off in more rapid comprehension of the required subject and
higher overall grades.

I can recall that my best college professors were the few that had their own
point of view and willingly shared it with the class.  This enhances the
professor's "personna" and makes the assigned material more memorable.
Just how much of Gurr's success in teaching is influenced by a particular
philosopher's view, as opposed to his colorful technique, is debatable.
While I haven't had time to read all the material on this website -- it's
massive -- and so have not explored its "practical" applications, I'll admit
that his enthusiasm for Pirsig is quite evident.  For anyone interested,
Gurr's website is  http://www.usca.edu/math/~mathdept/hsg/.

> Let's talk about the compatibility of Essentialism and the
> MOQ, shall we?  Don't I have to consider your perspective
> in the process of comparing them?
> I mean, the idea that I've not considered your perspective
> in the context of this thread is ridiculous. I've been talking
> about your perspective and have done so in response to
> specific statements by you. What else can a guy do?

Okay, NOW who's the "drama queen"?

Ham had asked:

> How do you see the MoQ influencing or "treating real
> world problems"?  How do you see it filling the "spiritual
> emptiness" of our technological age?  And how does
> "putting the little self" down by dismissing individuality
> cure the alienation of man?  (It would appear to make it
> only worse.)

DMB:

> Those are all very big questions. Are you sincerely interested in the
> answers?

Yes.

> If you're sincerely interested in understanding the central
> concepts of the system we're here to discuss,   I'd ask you
> to begin with something more specific and managable.
> I'd ask you to begin with the explanations and
> Pirsig quotes I already provided. (And were deleted from your
> response.) You asked about a very key concept (Thou art That)
> but ignored the explanation and Pirsig quote I gave as an answer,
> for example. I'll ask you to reply to that same post again, but
> this time around please pretend that you're actually interested in
> the answers. Its quite alright if you find something doesn't make
> sense or is otherwise objectionable so long as you explain
> specifically what the problem is. ...
> But to get even more specific about your perspective,
> I would ask what you think the real aim of the MOQ is.
> If mysticism is a distraction from Pirsig's aim, then what
> is he shooting for instead? And what makes you think so?
>
> That might be a useful conversation because I think you don't
> see what he's aiming at.

The Orientalist Alan Watts wrote a little book called "You are IT", which
expresses the Thou art That concept.  However, I don't think this idea is
central to Pirsig's philosophy; in fact, by defining the individual self it
runs counter to Pirsig's collectivism.  (But we can argue that later, if you
insist.)

The word "aim" applied to a philosophy can infer "purpose" or "objective",
but it can also involve the author's motivations.  In that sense, the author
might have had a personal goal to achieve academic recognition or celebrity
as a writer.  It is my opinion that Pirsig initially sought to develop a
metaphysical model of the universe that would successfully overcome duality.
This necessitated a radical departure from Aristotelian ontology, prompting
him to explore Eastern mysticism and the Platonists, his earlier work
showing the influence of both.

Although a partial metaphysics was outlined in the SODV paper, Pirsig
probably realized that it was going to be problematic, and decided to
capitalize on his literary talent and the success of ZMM by taking a
different slant -- that of a story-telling moralist.  By the time LILA was
published, the author had a acquired a modest following, and the MOQ had
established a certain "cult status" which, I expect, will be his
philosophical legacy.

However, I assume that your question refers to the supposed "mission" of the
philosophical movement based on Pirsig's work but including "LILA's Child"
and MoQ publications by other authors.  I ran across a quote from Glen
Bradbury's Post-Mortem Page ["MOQ Catechism"] which for me defines the scope
of Pirsig's philosophy, as well as its message: "In the history of the
universe, static quality has been evolving from the inorganic level upwards
through to the intellectual level, becoming more dynamic, and striving
toward Dynamic Quality."

Although this is the voice of a lone "dissenter", the statement suggests
that the MOQ is loosely bound to Naturalism.  Purportedly offering a
non-theistic alternative to the nihilism of our generation, it melds the Zen
concept of a unified source with the positivist view (of organic complexity)
that the cosmos is an inexorable movement in the direction of "betterness".
Its central message is that mankind is an integral part of this evolutionary
"morality" and can attain a measure of contentment through the experience of
moral goodness (Quality) by seeking excellence in all endeavors rather than
in trying to satisfy egocentric needs.  As such, the MoQ is not so much a
metaphysical thesis as an esthetic-based "morality system" largely drawn
from Taoist, Buddhist, and Native American cultures.

I realize this is more than you asked for, but thought it best that you have
my candid, full-blown appraisal of the MoQ and its author's aspirations.
Now you can proceed to tell me everything about it that I have misunderstood
or failed to grasp.

Thanks for the opportunity.  (You will let me know, won't you, when you do
decide to have me ex-communicated?)

Peace,
Ham