[MD] 42

[John Carl]

Andre,


I have two things in mind: a very general question of why are we here on
> earth? What is our purpose here?
>
> The second thing that mingles with this is Pirsig's variant on the
> Buddhist poem on page 406 of LILA:
> "While sustaining biological and social patterns
> Kill all intellectual patterns...and then follow Dynamic Quality and
> morality will be served"
>
> It appears to me that these lines refer to a non-dual perspective...the
> fusing of what Paul, in his paper terms an epistemological and an
> ontological context.
> Presently the vast majority of the purpose of education seems to lie not
> even close to either the epistemological nor the ontological context: it is
> presented as driven by the given: driven by economics, industry, private
> and public business corporations...their values incorporated and reinforced
> through ('personal') exposure to and internalization of values serving
> their vested interests (this is the ground stuff of mainstream education
> including parental) plus a vast network of public service type values to
> keep the system going...the political economy...the giant as Pirsig refers
> to it in LILA.
>
>
J:  I'm not exactly sure what a "non-dual perspective" would see, but about
the Giant I agree and have a question for you, and in fact, for anybody who
can answer.  Isn't it a de facto necessity that the Giant MUST operate
according to a SOM system?  It seems that a values perspective would of
necessity be operating on a shifting scale of shades of gray and what the
system requires is a binary decision process of simple black and white in
order to function.

It just seems the checks and balances of competing selves that make up the
body of the Giant, requires the metaphysical underpinning of a certain
absoluteness of subject and object.  I ask because lately it occurs to me
that the urge to "change the system" is inherently a lost cause.  I'd like
to know for sure if that is so or not.

Andre:


> I see this as an emphasis on static patterns of value. My own experience
> (as a beginning teacher) left very little room for reflection let alone
> talking about purpose (apart from satisfying the needs of the giant...which
> is 'the given'...the economic garbage). A strict adherence to policy was
> called for and the (politically determined) guidelines were changed every 1
> or 2 years (depending on which party swung the scepter). There was no room
> for professional innovation, autonomy or adjustment. So very soon,
> realizing that certain prescribed methods simply did not work, one was told
> to simply follow policy...and to lower standards of academic achievement if
> it was seen that most students failed to pas exams. This of course in the
> context of a fair amount of money being available for the educational
> institution for every student who graduated.
>
> Currently there appears to be too much emphasis on this nowhere land
> (flatland). It is the 'sustaining (and incessantly improving) of biological
> and social patterns'...with variations/innovations occurring on the same
> old themes...and stamping these as 'creative'. The driving force of which,
> for sure, is DQ but received, guided, maintained and projected into the
> future by a commonly shared consciousness that is egocentric and
> narcissistic...just what the giant wants and feeds on (fooling everyone of
> course because the only winner is the giant and there really is no heaven
> above!).
>


John:  Yes!  I guess my question revolves around this egocentric narcissism
being such a driving force for the Giant, whether without it anything at
all would happen.  There's a certain amount of Giantism that's necessary
for computer chips to be assembled and programs to be produced.


Andre:

This is the sq side of the equation.
>
> As I hinted there appears very little to no time (or energy) to address
> the other side of the equation...the DQ side. Times to reflect, ask
> question about purpose, about arete (and not just in an economic or social
> status sense). But not only reflect on static patterns. I mean it the way
> Pirsig argues...rta, dharma and karma (evolutionary garbage and the dumping
> of this garbage).
>
> Those moments when it is painfully obvious (and we see this every day on
> the TV news and hear it on the radio and other social media) what the
> results are in the clinging to the static patterns of the world and the
> role that current educational policy and practices play in the perpetuation
> of this state of affairs (plus of course the consequences when you don't).
>
> Moments to detach oneself from these static patterns (LILA p407). Perhaps
> ways should be found to build that right into the education system and not
> have it relegated to one's 'personal/private' meditation room, one's whim
> ...or whenever time and energy is found.
>
> What needs to be challenged and seen through is the ego driven,
> self-centered purpose of the giant in which we are all brought up and
> subjected to accept as God given. This (self)destructive, violent and
> aggressive consciousness needs to be replaced.
>
> Love, kindness, compassion and a respect for silence are seen as weaklings
> in this chain. What a pity.
>

I do not have the answers Arlo, Dan, dmb. It's a complex issue with many
> interested parties clashing over fundamentals and outcomes. I suppose to
> summarize I'd go for DQ/sq with a healthy and stimulating balance of the
> two. Stability on the one hand and freedom on the other. By joining hands
> we should be able to work things out. But that is a tough task as not
> everyone wants to join in.
>
> Anyway, for what it's worth.
>
>
>
Worth a lot, in my very humble opinion.  You put your finger on it for
sure.

Thanks,

John