[MD] Dewey's Zen

[david buchanan]

David H:
Also, Pirsig's quote above is interesting.  I can't recall any other quote where he refers to an 'amount' of Dynamic Quality.  To me, that's very shaky ground he is treading on by claiming that there is an 'amount' of Dynamic Quality in something.  I'm sure if we queried him on it he would note the error and agree that Dynamic Quality cannot have an 'amount'. What we're really talking about is the effects of Dynamic Quality.  It's always after the fact that we can refer to the 'amount' of DQ in something and as soon as we point to that amount - it's no longer DQ.  We can draw these analogies of DQ as little or as far as we like...

dmb says:
I take your point but I also don't think Pirsig is talking about quantities and it's not that DQ is in "things". DQ is just immediate experienced as it comes and the "things" involved are always some kind of static quality. To quantify is also going to be conceptual and static. The idea here, I think, is to maintain a kind of openness to experience, is to let the feel of it lead you as much as practiced skills in a kind of focused engagement. You know, being in the groove, in the zone, going with the flow, jamming, surfing, ect.. You have know what you're doing and otherwise achieve a kind of mastery but also stay open and pay attention to whatever experience offers as it unfolds. 


David H, said:
 Yeah, those balance analogies are awesome.  There are some on this forum to whom I think you'll agree - would be wise to digest the perils of too much DQ.



dmb says:
Yes, exactly. DQ is not some magical force that automatically makes you competent in every domain. DQ cannot replace hard work, the attainment of skill and can't make you understand books that you haven't read carefully. That sort of attitude, I think, is just a cheap way to excuse intellectual laziness or apathy. In the immortal words of Daffy Duck, it's despicable.