[MD] "100% confident"

[Ham Priday]

Greetings Ian, also Ron and SA --


> Very interestingly Ham, you said
>
>> There are a several here who apparently skipped Science in school
>> and regard metaphysics as a branch of Physics.  They're looking for
>> factual answers about the universe and are frustrated that the
>> intelligentsia in this forum aren't forthcoming with them.
>> Since intuitive concepts are new to these folks, their first impulse
>> is to attack the messenger.  They'll quote what Pirsig says on every
>> issue; but, unfortunately, despite naming his philosophy the
>> Metaphysics of Quality, what Pirsig actually said about
>> metaphysics was mostly disparaging.
>
> I agree with the thrust of your concern about people looking for
> simple "objective" answers and the frustrated reaction that elicits,
> but why "unfortunately" Ham, about Pirsig effectively disparaging
> metaphysics ?
>
> For me this pragmatic conclusion is it's value. The fact MoQ is
> misnamed is an accident of history (something I have remarked several
> times before) - but it doesn't undermine its quality.

Okay, I'll bite.  Why does the author title his moralistic philosophy "The 
Metaphysics of Quality" if it is not metaphysics??  An "accident of 
history," you say?  Rather, an error in judgment, I suspect, which is indeed 
"unfortunate".  How can he disparage metaphysics if he claims to be 
advancing a metaphysical philosophy?   Does this give him some prestige in 
the academic community?  Evidently not, since he refuses to define his 
fundamental reality in metaphysical terms which has raised skepticism among 
his colleagues.  From what I understand, Pirsig never received an M.A. in 
Philosophy, was an English teacher by trade, and has applied his writing 
skills to semi-autobiographical novels that (whether pragmatic or not) have 
developed a cult following for their use of Quality as a moral theme.

There's nothing wrong with writing, poetry, fiction, or essays on moral 
quality, and Mr. Pirsig is a creative and thoughtful writer.  Actually, I 
think the Quality theme has significant philosophical and moral value.  But 
my particular interest is metaphysics, and while I'm not an academic either, 
I dislike seeing this approach to philosophy maligned by people who've been 
told that definitions are an impediment to understanding.   That's pure 
nonsense, as any philosopher or English professor should know.

Thanks for joining in, Ian.  I hope you find my criticism of Pirsig as 
interesting as my statement about the confusion over metaphysics.

Essentially yours,
Ham