[MD] Another parallel

[Matt Kundert]

DMB said:
This is what I was trying to say to Matt the other day. He 
finds "tensions" in the MOQ, which means "contradictions". 
He seems pretty confident that he has spotted 
contradictions that Pirsig wasn't quite smart enough or 
careful enough to notice. I suppose that's possible just 
because nobody is perfect. But when it comes down to 
specific cases where one Pirsig quote seems to contradict 
another Pirsig quote, I think they only seem contradictory 
because the quotes are not properly understood. I do not 
recall a single case where the alleged contradiction can't be 
resolved by a better interpretation of the quotes, or by a 
better reading of at least one of them.

Matt:
Wow.  I'm really sorry I gave the above impression.

I just spent the last few minutes perusing the posts I sent 
in that created the recent teapot-tempest, and the thing 
of it is, I didn't introduce the word "contradiction," you did.  
My early stuff was basically, yeah, vague and broad, blank 
assertions of "tensions," which I don't think I mean as 
"contradiction," which is a pretty heavy word I usually try 
not to bother lifting.

And no, I don't think I'm confident about "spotting 
contradictions," though I do have lingering feelings from my 
days of exclusive involvement with Pirsig that there were 
"tensions," tensions being a term of art, I suppose, that 
might mean two positions that seemingly pull in opposite 
ways.  (I do have records of this involvement, and I'd 
mainly point at my "Philosophologology" paper.)

And see how soft I put that?  "Seemingly"?  Those words 
are put there on purpose, because while I am, as the 
bearer of my brain, pretty confident I have vague feelings 
of tension regarding Pirsig's "system," I am not confident 
that they are really there, which is why I was trying to elicit 
better articulation from others to assuage my doubt.  I 
apologize that you telling me to not have doubt doesn't 
work--I just like reading good and interesting writings, and 
I was trying to prompt some.  I think there might be good 
work to be done by people interested in this area and I'd 
be interested to audit it.

You keep imputing to me the belief that I think Pirsig is 
stupid, but I find that imputation highly disingenous and 
just plain stupid--as I said before, I'm not talking about 
Pirsig's intelligence or rigor in writing, but more like his 
cultural reception.

So let me state again--I _want_ the interpretations that 
iron out passage A and passage B in tandem.  I'm just 
looking for them.  I like reading inventive strings of words 
articulating illuminating minds doing motivated work.

Matt

p.s.  I mean, really, I try hard to not impute too directly to 
you the view that you think Pirsig is infallible, but it 
becomes difficult sometimes.  I like Pirsig quite a bit, but 
you make it hard.  That's typically why I fly away 
occasionally--you make it difficult for me to enjoy the 
penetration of Pirsig's mind because of your method of 
reading (which is to say "writing to the MD").

_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync. 
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_BR_life_in_synch_062009