[MD] Plato's Good vs. Pirsig's Quality

Fri May 22 05:05:58 PDT 2009

Ant,
I guess, what I'm saying is that I think,Plato and Aristotle, saw themselves as defenders
of truth and excellence. Which is partly why Sophistry and rehtoric are looked apon
the way it is today to describe the tactics of politicians, lawyers and evangelists.

Even superman stands for "truth, justice and the american way"

I think Pirsig is justified in his claim.

thx
-Ron

________________________________
From: X Acto <xacto at rocketmail.com>
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 7:31:36 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] Plato's Good vs. Pirsig's Quality

Ant,
I think Plato thought, contrary to Socrates, that excellence, the good, could be taught
or at least systematically arrived at. I think watching Socrates, argueable the finest Sophist
of the day, lose to a band of spin doctors and wordsmiths set his mission. To once and for
all define truth or at least a system to arrive at it unbiasly. I think truth amounted to the 
justification or the justice of the good for Plato.

Been Reading:
Nietzsches "tradgedy in the age of the greeks", some Hiedigger, chuck Kahn
Aristotles organon, Platos republic, what I can dig up on Heraticlus and
Parmenides xenophanes Aniximander, Reidel, Mohen Matten
Joseph Owens and anything I can dig up on stanford encyclopedia of
philosophy

Thanks
-Ron

________________________________
From: Ant McWatt <antmcwatt at hotmail.co.uk>
To: moq discuss <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 5:24:50 PM
Subject: [MD] Plato's Good vs. Pirsig's Quality

Ron,

Many thanks for the helpful overview of how the Good and truth were perceived from Parmenides to Plato to Aristotle though, of course, I’m primarily asking DMB a rather more specific question i.e. how far does the understanding of the Good put forward in Plato’s “Republic” support the assertion of Pirsig’s that Marsha quotes below!

“Plato hadn't tried to destroy areté. He had encapsulated it; made a permanent, fixed Idea out of it; had converted it to a rigid, immobile Immortal Truth. He made areté the Good, the highest form, the highest Idea of all. It was subordinate only to Truth itself, in a synthesis of all that had gone before."(ZMM, Chapter 29) 

Anyway, just out of interest, are you using any particular references outside Pirsig (such as H.D.F. Kitto's "The Greeks") in your overview?

Best wishes,

Anthony

Ron stated May 21st:

Ant,

If I may jump in for a second, In my reading, the sophists thought of excellence as a practice, an activity. Like dance or athletics. Something that really could not be taught but developed through practice and guidance, an action of being.

Plato, I believe, asked where the idea of excellence originates, how does one know what excellence is? He thought the concept of excellence preceded the act. Keeping in mind Plato was influenced by Parmenides, He considered the concept of excellence or the good as more real than the act which was subject to change and interpretation.

Enter Aristotle who clarifies the situation by stating that why the idea of the good is more permanent is because the good is an idea understood universally but to understand what was good was an argument made from the particular expereince to a universal understanding. Aristotle disagreed with Plato in that he believed the material world is what gives rise to ideas about it.

Aristotle was the one who equated the good with what is "true" and truth
is a sort of sameness with being like what "is". 

-Ron

________________________________
From: Ant McWatt <antmcwatt at hotmail.co.uk>
To: moq discuss <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 4:45:29 PM
Subject: [MD] MD Plato's Good vs. Pirsig's Quality

DMB said May 20th 2009:

Funny thing is, I'd just finished a 15 page term paper comparing Plato's Good and Pirsig's Quality. (Among other things, we read the Republic, where the allegory of the cave serves as one of three analogies for the Good.) So I was just covering the same ground for my Plato class. It was no trick at all to see that both terms are central in their own context. It could just be a reflection of the reading list for this particular course and there is a ton of Plato I haven't read but it's my impression that you can [not] tell a story about Plato without including the Good. Same with Pirsig and his Quality. They'd both tell you their central term refers to the source and substance of everything. If they were excluded, I wouldn't know how to say anything of any substance about either of them...

Ant McWatt just had to ask:

Dave,

>From your reading of the Republic and other research for your Plato/Pirsig term paper, do you think Plato considered the Good as primarily static (as per the other Forms) or essentially Dynamic (on the lines of DQ)? 

Moreover, did you discover anything else particularly significant in this Good/Quality comparison?  

Best wishes,

Anthony

.

_________________________________________________________________
Share your photos with Windows Live Photos – Free.
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/134665338/direct/01/
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/