andrew_russell/fs/ksg@ksg.harvard.edu
Wed, 18 Mar 1998 09:38:24 +0100
andrew russell/fs/ksg
03/18/98 01:07 AM
To: lilasqd@hkg.com
cc:
First, please forgive my delay in response. It takes me a long time to
process a maze of thoughts and random connections into words that people
can understand. And my time spent wandering far outweighs my time
writing...
Now I haven't seen anything that Pirsig has said about Marx, and Marx
probably didn't say too much about Pirsig. But as I hope will be clear,
both men write because they perceive a lack of Quality, and they have
strong enough minds to defy convention and the deeply embedded status quo
to seek better explanations for some basic and simple, yet essential,
questions.
First we need to talk about Marx's philosophy of labor. [I am, in part,
paraphrasing Erich Fromm. Male gender is used for clarity and accuracy
(Marx used it).] Labor can be defined as the interaction between man and
nature; both man and nature participate in the process of labor. For Marx,
Labor is the essential element in human history; Marx defines World history
as the history of labor, as all we have accomplished to differentiate us
from the animals and live more evolved, sophisticated lives is built on
thousands of years of labor. It is important to note that Marx considers
labor to be ALL productive activity, which of necessity includes both
physical and non-physical labor -- the material world as well as the world
of ideas, or philosophy, from bricklaying to accounting to abstract
theorizing. All of these contributed to the creation of this world.
We define ourselves by the products of our struggles, of our work, of our
labor. We build ourselves and the world around us through this
ever-present, self-renewing process.
Simplicity dictates my need to quote Fromm to sum up and not ramble. A
taste of this is all we need to discuss its relation to Pirsig.
"Labor is the self-expression of man, an expression of his individual
physical and mental powers. In this process of genuine activity man
develops himself, becomes himself; work is not only a means to an end -the
product- but an end in itself, the meaningful expression of human energy;
hence work is enjoyable."
The metaphysical implications are that man uses everything in his power -
all that he knows, his very best, his highest Quality - to go go forward
with his life (evolve). I hope that I have made it clear that "labor" is
not just what you do at your job, but your life-force. For Marx, the
life-force is primary, and THAT is what you pour into what you do, and THAT
is how you create who you are. The Quality, the life-force, is first; the
rest follows according to our design and interpretation. The most primary
knowledge is of ourselves: "Cogito ergo sum."
We apply what we are to where we are and what we see. It is an interactive
process but we are in the unique position of the creators.
Marx wrote because capitalism was perverting that life force, or Quality,
and detaching man from himself and his fellow men. The concept of
"alienation" is the key component of the Marxist philosophical critique of
capitalism and will have to wait until tomorrow.
(note: Is Quality a/the fuel of evolution?)
PIRSIG
Marxist humanism has a similar "feel" to the MoQ. Pirsig's attitude on work
is a common theme in ZMM, as expressed in his many meditations on the
maintenance of a motorcycle, particularly in the sections about mechanics
and the style of thinking revealed by organization and cleanliness.
Also helpful here, as a useful aside, is the input of a Harvard physicist
on the source of scientific curiosity (a perspective representative of many
similar writings I've seen by other quantum physicists): the goal of a
scientific explanation, to achieve the ultimate simplicity with the
greatest level of complexity, is fundamentally an aesthetic choice.
Science, or in other words, Rationality itself, is driven by the
unscientific, the non-rational!
More echoes of Pirsig....
Pirsig's oft-quoted epiphany on p.293 (chp. 26) is in the context of
putting all of your mental energies into fixing a "mechanical" problem:
"The real cycle you're working on is a cycle called yourself. The machine
that appears to be 'out there' and the person that appears to be 'in here'
are not two seperate things. They grow toward Quality or fall away from
Quality together."
Or in other words, Quality manifests itself through your interaction, your
labor, with the machine 'out there.'
Another interesting relevant passage is P's experiment with the grading
system in his class. This experience reinforces the assumption that
curiosity will awaken itself, if left unforced; the language Pisig employs,
'creative intelligence', 'push from inside', and 'free man', all of these
terms have a similar ring to Marxian philosophy as well as to true
liberation.
When this critical relationship - that drives man toward innovation - is
disrupted, severe social and psychological problems result. Both authors
frame these problems in the language of alienation, and in the context of
that old metaphysical struggle of the one versus the many. Metaphysics, and
Quality, have little meaning to a man who is no longer considered a man,
but simply an unthinking constant on the shop floor, a part of a machine
(examples of the pain this causes abound in 19th-20th C. art, literature,
popular/modern music). Marxist and Pirsigian interpretations of this
detachment, and possibilities for a resolution to it, to come at a later
date.
Most significant is a coomon perception of a lack of Quality with the state
of the affairs of our culture and society that has sever ramifications on
relationships for most humans in this culture and society. The MoQ is
EXTREMELY relevant to any well-thought out social agenda to challenge the
low-Quality aspects of the status quo.
Andy
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:56 CEST