[MD] Able to change well.

[plattholden at gmail.com]

On 31 Aug 2010 at 12:40, schoadabyool at talktalk.net wrote:


ello Ade,

I think all Pirsig means by his last sentence in the above quote is that we  
can't escape from making judgments. That may seem obvious. But it's one of 
those universal facts (like the present moment) that is often either ignored, 
accepted without question, or brushed aside as unimportant.

What's unique about PIrsig's metaphysics is his application of judgment-making  

to all worldly phenomena, judgments made in response to Dynamic Quality. Most 
such responses are now frozen in permanent static patterns, like iron filings 
now always preferring to cling to magnets. But, though we're made up of 
millions of static patterns, we humans still have the ability to respond to the 

force of  Dynamic Quality, whether we call it God, the One, the Absolute, the 
Creator, Arete, Excellence, Virtue, Higher Power, Beauty, or you-name-it --the 
force of evolutionary creation is out there, waiting for us connect and follow 
its call to perfection and freedom. .

But, I could be wrong,

Regards,
Platt      



Hello Platt,
You have stated it succinctly.
Thank you sir.


The moq is very much not unique in applying an ability to judge in the manner 
you describe as i keep discovering.
It's central to many beliefs, but rejected by modernity. I'll grant you that.
Shopenhauer is rejected for the same reason for example, and his notion of the 
Universal Will is restricted to living things only by those who choose to take 
him seriously. It is Shopenhauer who spoke of magnets having a preference to do 
what they do, and it is also held by Aristotle that things fall to the ground 
because they prefer to do so.
When Shopenhauer writes about the Universal Will, i do take him seriously. So 
when the moq says the same thing i take it seriously also.


Because Robert Pirsig is ruminating his thoughts in the novel he doesn't list 
the possible sources that may have informed this thinking. Which i do not argue 
with and accept for what it is.


What is unique about the moq in my opinion is that it is an individuation of 
our commonly held heritage.
If we connect to this as you say we have the opportunity to ripen as 
individuals.

By the way, i wish it were true that the moq is as unique as appears to be 
believed, but i can't hold this view in the light of what i read and interpret. 
Like you, i understand that i may be wrong also.
I don't think this detracts from the books?
I would never avoid recommended them.

Hello Ade,

I'm a great fan of Schopenhauer, primarily because, as Will Durant writes, "He 
saw that the ultimate good is beauty, and that the ultimate joy lies in the 
creation and cherishing of the beautiful." If there is a central theme to my 
life that would be it. Regretfully I never made enough money to fund the 
creation and collection of great beauty like the Carnegies, Rockefellers and 
Vanderbilts, but what little excess I had over daily needs has been directed 
toward that goal. One need not be a millionaire to surround himself with 
beautiful things. A child's finger painting can qualify.

As you point out, other philosophers besides Pirsig have identified a creative 
evolutionary force leading to perfection -- the concept of teleology. Perhaps 
its most prominent recent proponent was Teilhard de Chardin. Pirsig 
acknowledges teleology in "Lila" but claims his metaphysics satisfies not only 
those who believe it, but also Darwinians who don't. He wrote:

"Good! The "undefined fittest" they are defending is identical to Dynamic 
Quality. Natural selection is Dynamic Quality at work. There is no quarrel 
whatsoever between the Metaphysics of Quality and the Darwinian Theory of 
Evolution. Neither is there a quarrel between the Metaphysics of Quality and 
the "teleological" theories which insist that life has some purpose. What the 
Metaphysics of Quality has done is unite these opposed doctrines within a 
larger metaphysical structure that accommodates both of them without 
contradiction." (Lila, 11)

Perhaps you'll agree with me that joining these disparate views is unique. I 
certainly agree with you that Pirsig's emphasis on individuation is not only 
central to his philosophy, but a necessary condition to achieve Dynamic 
Quality's highest good -- freedom. 

In any case, it's a pleasure to exchange ideas with you. Thank you.

Regards,
Platt