Platt Holden (pholden@worldnet.att.net)
Sun, 26 Jul 1998 03:55:30 +0100
Hi Andy, Diana and LS:
Thanks Andy for a fine interpretation of Ken Wilber's metaphysics
vis-a-vis
Pirsig's. I agree that both attack the SOM beast although I think Diana
puts her finger on the difference between the two when she says:
"DQ is part of everyday life which is something that both the Hindus and
the Western scientific realityists miss. One of his (Pirsig's) key
examples
of DQ is listening to a song on a radio. This experience, he says, is
the
same transcendent reality that the mystics are always going on about. He
demystifies mysticism, if you like."
Compare Pirsig's down to earth, everyday example of finding "mysticism"
in
hearing a song to Wilber's lofty description of the "Witness," as
related
by Andy:
"I am aware of the clouds; therefore I am more than the clouds. I am
aware
of the sky; therefore I am more than the sky. I am aware of my thoughts;
therefore I am more than my thoughts. This 'more than' is the Witness,
consciousness as such, which permeates being. Since all is Spirit, there
is
no subject and no object. All is Spirit's self-manifestation: all is
One."
Wilber makes an abstract, logical case for our connection to Spirit. His
method of persuasion is reason. He goes on to suggest that if you want
to
truly experience Spirit, you can enhance your "personal development"
through meditation. In contrast, Pirsig suggests you already truly
experience Spirit (Quality). You've experienced it since childhood.
Every
time you choose something better, you experience and express it. No
meditation, no personal development, no opening of a special "Eye of
Spirit" required. The evolutionary drive, the energy that makes
"transcend
and include" possible, the force needed to be and become is INNATE in
you,
expressed biologically as love and sex, socially as family and work,
intellectually as identity and organization, aesthetically as skill and
beauty. You don't have to seek it. You are it.
Now I'm exaggerating the differences between Wilber and Pirsig. Actually
they are more alike than different. They attack the same problem (SOM),
appeal to same indefinable something (Spirit, Quality) and seek to
provide
"different lenses with which we view the world" in order to "heal the
divide between science and religion." (Quotes from Andy's post.)
But while Wilber appeals largely to our rational side and constructs his
lens out of traditional "scientific sounding" evolutionary patterns,
Pirsig
takes a wild plunge into raw virgin territory and declares outrageously,
"The world is composed of nothing but moral value. Everything is an
ethical activity." I don't think Wilber comes even close to such a
revolutionary declaration.
Diana summed it up nicely: "Aesthetics and morals are not 'real' in the
SOM and that's why we have an aversion to building a theory around
them." Wilber shares that aversion by ignoring the central role of
aesthetics and morals in his theory (at least overtly), resulting in an
SOM cast to his metaphysics. For me, the MoQ is the more vital and
meaningful. But for sheer breadth of knowledge, clarity of thought and
luminescence of vision, Wilber can't be beat.
Andy wrote:
"Wilber's criteria of transcend and include is almost exactly in line
with Pirsig's Quality. "Does it transcend and include?" is simply a more
specific way of asking the question, "Does it have Quality?" Asking if
something has Quality is asking if it appeals to our aesthetic sense,
which is a sense that defies scientific definition. At the same time it
is appealing to our practical, or scientific sense. Is the motorcycle
fixed so that it is running well? Do the parts work better together?"
If you mean by "transcend and include" that a quality step up must
possess greater depth, and that this greater depth must simultaneously
produce a fuller and richer aesthetic response, I'm with you. In fact,
Andy, I'm with you 95 percent, which, in this group, is akin to minor
miracle. Thanks for adding greatly to the discussion. I look forward to
more of your insights.
Platt
-- homepage - http://www.moq.org/lilasquad unsubscribe/queries - mailto:lilasquad@moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:43:29 CEST