[MD] Knots

[david buchanan]

Mark said:
...In terms of Phaedrus, I also went through a temporary breakdown in the early eighties. It was not destructive enough for shock therapy, and I did have a community which supported me at the time. However, at the root of it was serious questioning which resulted in a complete dissociation from any firm footing in reality as I was used to. It was all quicksand without grounding. The creation of certain premises that I accepted as true, allowed rebuilding. ...


Platt replied:
We had much in common before and now even more. I, too, suffered a nervous breakdown years ago over a conflict of values that had potential devastating effect on my life. It was deep enough to require 22 shock treatments and hospitalization for three months. So I can relate to Pirsig's experience and like him, have worked to understand the underlying premises which affected me and why they turned out to be so self-destructive. Needless to say, his passage to higher understanding and sharing it in his books has led me to answers I never could have attained on my own. The experience proved to me the delusions S-O critical thinking can so easily create by it's infinite ability to weasel around any issue to justify a preconceived conclusion. The evidence of its shortcomings are everywhere, most recently in yesterday's U.S. election, but most notably in a highly educated Germany populace electing a Adolf Hitler. 



dmb says:

I can sympathize with your mental health problems and it's easy to see how you might feel a kinship with Pirsig because of that but that does NOT entitle you to distort what Pirsig says. And once again Pirsig's meaning is the very opposite of what you say it is. He said:

"Phaedrus thought that no other historical or political analysis explains the enormity of these forces as clearly as does the Metaphysics of Quality. The gigantic power of socialism and fascism, which have overwhelmed this century, is explained by a conflict of levels of evolution. This conflict explains the driving force behind Hitler not as an insane search for power but as an all-consuming glorification of social authority and hatred of intellectualism. His anti-Semitism was fueled by anti-intellectualism. His hatred of communists was fueled by anti-intellectualism. His exaltation of the German volk was fueled by it. His fanatic persecution of any kind of intellectual freedom was driven by it."

In the larger context of these remarks, Pirsig is saying that the history of the 20th century can best be understood as a conflict between social and intellectual values. In this particular passage, he is saying that ANTI-INTELLECTUALISM is the key to understanding fascism in general and Hitler in particular. The driving force behind fascism is "an all-consuming glorification of social authority and HATRED of intellectualism". In that sense, Platt, you have much more in common with Hitler than you do with Pirsig.

Pirsig says, "a culture that supports the dominance of intellectual values over social values is absolutely superior to one that does not."

If you need to believe certain things in order to maintain your sanity, those beliefs will be impervious to criticism. They are too important, too central, too crucial in their supporting role. But this supporting role is psychological, not intellectual. The intellectual value and validity of such beliefs isn't even relevant because that's just not what it's about. This explains the frustration I've been complaining about, that's for sure. We've been playing two completely different games the whole time and your game simply isn't about what's true. It's about mental hygiene.

Marsha, is there something you'd like to tell us?

Don't get me wrong. There but for the grace of god and all that. I've had some experiences that re-arranged my perspective in a big way, although none of them involved electro-shock therapy or any psychiatric hospital. And the most life-changing one was right after the conference in Liverpool. I'm sure it was a direct result of the events there. So I feel connected to the man on that level too. But that doesn't give me the right to distort what he says and your suffering doesn't either. It is immoral to treat his philosophy as your own personal comforter. It's not just intellectually bogus, it's selfish and creepy and it does a grave disservice to Pirsig's work.