[MD] The Academy is Evil! Here's what I'd do instead...

[ARLO J BENSINGER JR]

[Tim]
But, the academy, and the entire educational system, is a social structure, so
you cannot expect any revolutionary change to come from the inside. 

[Arlo]
I think this conflates the "Church of Reason" with the "brick and mortar", but
to the extent we have made the Church of Reason beholden to the social patterns
that are supposed to support but not control the Church of Reason, I agree. 

As with all things, yes, "change" can only come from "outside". I think that
part of Campbell's message about the rise and fall of civilizations. We see it
in Pirsig's Brujo story as much as we see it in Campbell's retelling of the how
Theseus represented the outsider (from Crete) who was the only one capable of
slaying the Minotaur (the dying empire of the Greeks, aka Greek's static social
structure).

[Tim]
The academy is continually finding a sort of dynamic equilibrium with the
slowly changing society it serves.  And, if you compare it with other social
institutions, I think I will have to agree with dmb, I don't have the exact
quote here, but, to paraphrase, the academy is probably the shining star.

[Arlo]
Agree.

[Tim]
But, the academy is no place for revolutionaries.  You won't find them there. 
The academy is a place for tortoises (not hares).  And again, socially
speaking, this is probably proper and for the best. 

[Arlo]
For the most part, I'd say this is correct. But as I said way back, I wouldn't
confuse being "outside the Academy" with ipso facto being a revolutionary.
There are quite a number of "nutjobs" hanging out outside those walls. 

Pirsig's own case is interesting. He was "outside" to the extent that he
finalized much of thinking after his experiences there, but he is not a full
outsider. He taught at the Montana State University, he went to graduate school
at the University of Chicago and taught classes and the University of Illinois.
A lot of his ideas took initial root via his friendship and activity with
Dusenberry, also a professor at MSU, whose academic work brought Pirsig into
contact with "the Indians". And even years after his involvement in the Academy
ended, he has been actively involved in support Ant's PhD.

[Tim]
I don't remember the precise numbers, but it was something like - and, you all
probably know that 'Science' is the creme de la creme of science journals - 3
years after publishing only 25% of the articles published in 'Science' have not
been proven faulty.  My point is that even amongst the best we have to offer,
it is not all that great.

[Arlo]
I actually think this is a GOOD thing, and demonstrates science's evolving
understanding. But, yes, it is a bad thing when lose sight of the provisional
nature of "truth" and begin to think that whatever "Science" says is True for
all ages.

[Tim]
Politics, and deceit, and exaggeration, and over-selling make it into the best
of the academy (at least in the sciences).  Perhaps this has to do with the
fact that the best scientists are more beggars-for-money than researchers
proper.

[Arlo]
Right. There is a funding/cost/money component to this that I think needs a
huge rethinking. I don't have a lot of fleshed out ideas, but professors are
often judged very heavily on the amount of research money they bring into their
respective colleges. Getting a million-dollar grant is akin to an Oscar
nomination. 

[Tim]
The point, for me, is that if you want a better society - or any social
structure there-within - you have to do the hard work of making a better
society.  Social structures react to compulsion.  Again, perhaps this is for
the best.

[Arlo]
Agree. I said something similar to John or Mark yesterday. A lot of these
problem would "go away" when (and sadly, if) the root understanding of ZMM
spreads. The problems with the Academy, the problems with in the local mechanic
shops, the problems with the labor alienation and consumerism, etc etc etc. 

[Tim]
Is it possible to have a society that does not force individuals to compromise
(dynamic) Quality?

[Arlo]
I think your question is oxymoronic, as "society" is by definition static
patterns of value. The closest analogy I can think of otherwise is a state of
pure anarchy, but the freedoms we enjoy that permit intellectual activity would
rapidly disappear. Some balance between static and Dynamic Quality is what
moves evolution forward.

[Tim]
Or, is society such a constraint on dynamic (and intellectual) Quality that we
will forever be nibbling at the margins?

[Arlo]
Social patterns certain constrain activity, but I think its important to see
that it enables a lot of freedom too. For example, laws that require you to
drive on a certain side of the road, and punish you with incarceration if you
don't comply, force a certain constraint on our behavior, but these laws in
turn enable a far greater freedom via the safe, rapid ability to travel. 

Thanks for joining in, Tim.