From: Matt Kundert (pirsigaffliction@hotmail.com)
Date: Sun Mar 20 2005 - 15:50:35 GMT
Hey Dan,
>David is right on the money here so far as I can see, and I think any
>sarcasm is justified. Now, I haven't had the luxury of going to college and
>studying philosophy but in a way I consider myself fortunate. I came to
>Robert Pirsig's work without any preconceived notions that I've had to fit
>with what RMP is saying.
>
>Instead, I've taken the time to really look at his work, to make an
>honestly rigorous effort at understanding, since my cup of tea was empty,
>so to speak. In other words, rather than expending effort at knocking the
>MOQ down, I've built it up over the years and as a result have had a
>wonderful time collaborating (although that might be too strong a word)
>with Mr. Pirsig in putting together Lila's Child. I have to tell you, I had
>the time of my intellectual life (up until now) in doing so.
I'll I'm going to say is that it would seem that you should also make some
sort of comment or answer towards my recent two-part post "Pirsig
Institutionalized" considering that the antiprofessionalism is turned up
full blast in this reply (combined stunningly, paradoxically, and
rhetorically to good effect with a flexing of professional interpretive
authority).
Also, consider this segment of a post I sent to Marsha recently:
This isn't a fan site. At least, it hasn't been a fan site for a long time.
People come here to join in conversation with others about their beliefs
(most of which revolving around Pirsig) in the hope of being illuminated
somehow. Some people don't find others illuminating. That happens. It
happens everywhere--all the time. It doesn't mean there's a "cultural
blindspot." That's the type of full scale paranoia that leads people to
think that the Jews are running the world, and other nonsense like that.
_Anybody_ who was impressed by Pirsig enough to show up here is already in
the process of revising their beliefs and ready to revise the language they
were handed by their culture. The ability to parse the bad stuff, the
"blindspots," from the good stuff, regular ole' "common sense," is a large
undertaking that takes no small amount of inquiring conversation. It takes
a lot of space and a lot of energy to convince reasonable people, even
like-minded people, of these things. Look at Pirsig: he took a lot of time,
energy, and space to write the things he did. And that's the way it should
be, because if we weren't exercising our critical thinking, any ole'
demogogue could come along and convince us all to be Scientologists.
But when the conversation breaks down, what are we to do? When hostility
ensues, and the conversation breaks down, both sides look to the other like
they've been won over by a demogogue.
Matt:
I mean, what evidence do you have that you've made an "honestly rigorous
effort at understanding" Pirsig and I haven't? Because you are never
critical of Pirsig and I am sometimes? Is that what you call not having
"preconceived notions"? What could you possibly know about me as a
philosopher, student, and person to question my honesty and sincerity, let
alone my professional integrity? Remember, it's a mark of professionalism
to make honest efforts at understanding. Do you think I'm _lying_ when I
say in "Confessions" that I was obsessed with Pirsig long before I even knew
who Rorty was? Do you really think I'm lying when I tell you that I became
obsessed with Pirsig _before_ I knew anything about philosophy, when I was a
first-semester freshman taking Philosophy 101, and that it was an obsession
with _Pirsig_ that led me around to reading other philosophy, that it was an
obsession with _Pirsig_ that led me to read Rorty, the supposed person who's
rotting my brain?
And I think my honest effort _and_ my understanding of Pirsig is not only
displayed through my development throughout my stay at the MD (from 2001 to
the present), but in particular through the time and energy I spend in
producing evidence, fashioning arguments, developing interpretations and
merging them all together in extended essays.
I just don't understand how people can be so dismissive of all the work I've
put in to understanding Pirsig, and then have the nerve to call _me_
dishonest. Do you really think I'm doing this for fun? That I'm just doing
this to annoy everyone here? You could say that about certain others, like
perhaps Straun Hellier, who just seemed to like to come on and say nasty
things. But I think, given all available evidence, there are few people who
are as obsessed about Pirsig as I am, who are as obsessed in trying to make
Pirsig matter. I mean, do you honestly believe that I'm trying to _destroy_
Pirsig's philosophy? That all my efforts at criticism and then
reconstruction are not an honest effort, from my point of view, at trying to
make Pirsig's philosophy better? Am I not, after all, following Pirsig when
he says, "The suffering which the Buddhists regard as only that which is to
be escaped, is seen by the MOQ as merely the negative side of the
progression toward Quality (or, just as accurately, the expansion of
quality). Without the suffering to propel it, the cart would not move
forward at all." If criticism is something like negative suffering, then
aren't I an integral part of the expansion of Pirsig's philosophy? That
only after engaging me does Pirsig's philosophy become stronger? Whatever
doesn't kill us will only make us stronger?
Who knows? Maybe Rorty is a blight on the land and Pirsig's literal word is
the Way and the Truth. But how can you sit there in your computer chair and
write that I'm dishonest and insincere when the only _honest_ way of knowing
_any_ of these things is to engage with my arguments, my interpretations,
and my carefully constructed essays?
Please, Dan, leave the insults to DMB.
Matt
_________________________________________________________________
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to
get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Mar 20 2005 - 15:54:00 GMT