[MD] Creativity and Philosophology, 2 (from 2005)

[Ian Glendinning]

That was certainly Pirsig's hope John - to throw down the gauntlet.

But history shows it had the opposite effect - reinforced in Baggini's
attitude to the subject.

Regards
Ian

On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 5:58 PM, John Carl<ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:
> Nah, nothing like a real gauntlet in your face to raise a reaction.
> "Come out and fight you wussy academic philosophologists you!"
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Ian Glendinning
> <ian.glendinning at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> That's a great contribution John, I'd forgetten that question was
>> explicit in the Baggini interview.
>>
>> ... except for one minor thing ...
>>
>> Clearly Pirsig says he wants others to criticize and raise his game
>> (and in my experience he is genuine in that), but at the time,
>> branding those others as somehow inferior philosophologists clearly
>> had the opposite effect (as in fact you might expect).
>>
>> Regards
>> Ian
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 5:28 PM, John Carl<ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Steve, Matt, and all,
>> > Last night or the night before while clicking through archives and links
>> and
>> > what-not I came across this interview, with the following insight into
>> the
>> > question:
>> >
>> >
>> > BAGGINI: I like the idea of “philosophology” as opposed to real
>> philosophy.
>> > And I am sure that one of the main trappings of academic philosophy is
>> that
>> > it encourages the former rather than the latter. But I'm not sure the
>> > distinction is as neat as you present it, and this is what I think serves
>> as
>> > an obstacle to the reception of the MOQ.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > PIRSIG: No, it isn't neat, since most philosophologists also philosophize
>> > and most philosophers also philosophologise.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 7:59 AM, Steven Peterson <
>> peterson.steve at gmail.com>wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Matt,
>> >>
>> >> Let me grant that you've successfully "fuzzed-up" the distinction
>> >> between philosophy and philosophology that Pirsig and others would
>> >> like to keep distinct.
>> >
>> >
>> > So from my reading of this quote, the distinction was "fuzzed-up" even
>> > before Matt.  It was intended as a fuzzy distinction by its creator.
>>  Pirsig
>> > also talks about doing philosophology himself, but his primary
>> orientation
>> > is as philosopher who is a half-assed philosophologist, rather than the
>> > other way around.
>> >
>> > How this relates to the debate is the distinction is not who we are, it
>> is
>> > in what we do -   In the moment I can do philosophy or I can do
>> > philosophology.  There is a clear distinction,  in the moment of doing,
>> > which is not fuzzy.  Which one I am, is determined by which one I am
>> doing.
>> >  And it changes.
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> You've said that Pirsig wants us to keep this distinction because it
>> >> frees him from the criticisms of academia. Can you see any other
>> >> purpose for which this distinction could still be useful?
>> >>
>> >
>> > Well I don't agree with that "reason" as Pirsig's.   He plainly wants the
>> > criticisms of academia.  I mean, who wouldn't?  I can't imagine anything
>> > more exciting than waking up and finding academia criticizing me.
>> >
>> > BAGGINI: Your alter-ego Phaedrus is the epitome of the lone philosopher.
>> He
>> > doesn't ignore other philosophers completely, but he doesn't have
>> > well-informed fellow philosophers to push him and test him, and he
>> develops
>> > his own philosophy mostly independently from that which has gone before.
>> I
>> > would suggest, however, that he makes the opposite error of the
>> > philosophologists he seems to feel superior too: they spend too much time
>> > rehearsing the ideas of others, but he underestimates the extent to which
>> > others can help us to raise our game and think better.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > PIRSIG: Any time others want to help me raise my game and think better,
>> I'm
>> > all for it. The problem has been that those academic others who should be
>> > engaging the Metaphysics of Quality have remained silent for 31 years in
>> > contrast to the response of the general public.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > John
>> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> > Archives:
>> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>> >
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>