[MD] Metaphysics: what it is good for?

[david buchanan]

John said:

Sincere thanks to Paco and David for cordial, thoughtful, and supportive replies to my recent post, which was, I confess, somewhat deliberately "baited".  David, your reply affirms the basic goodness and openness that Dr. Pirsig always manifested.  You truly participate in the spirit of his affirmation of the Good. ... Thank you both, and thank you all, for showing that mutually affirming dialogue is possible among people of good will in this often contentious and sometimes petty forum.


dmb says:
Supportive replies and affirming dialogue? Quite the opposite. I posted the quotes from Lila in order to show the MOQ's opposition to your claim. 

" ...rituals are seen as merely a static portrayal of Dynamic Quality, a sign-post which allows socially pattern-dominated people to see Dynamic Quality." As I read it, Pirsig is saying that ritualistic religion is static social quality. To the extent that these static patterns are mistaken for what they merely represent, such rituals "destroy the Dynamic Quality they were originally intended to preserve." (Lila, p.385) 
"Phaedrus thought sectarian religion was a static social fallout from Dynamic Quality," he says, and "it would certainly be a mistake to think that the MOQ endorses the static beliefs of any particular religious sect".  (Lila, p.376)
"In all religions bishops tend to gild Dynamic Quality with all sorts of static interpretations because their cultures require it. But these interpretations become like golden vines that cling to a tree, shut out its sunlight and eventually strangle it." (Lila, p.377)

Pirsig repeatedly issues the same sort of warning with respect to intellectual static patterns. Metaphysics is a 30,000 page menu but we ought not try to eat the menu. We don't mistake static intellectual portraits of DQ for DQ itself either. Static patterns of either kind can help evoke an experience of the "transcendent", if you're lucky, but the opposite effect is far more likely. A "transcendent" experience is more likely to shatter those fossilized, brittle and rigid truths of the past than affirm them.