Re: LS Obtaining both sQ & DQ in real life

From: Diana McPartlin (diana@hongkong.com)
Date: Mon Aug 09 1999 - 13:23:37 BST


Squad

David wrote:
>Squad: Almost any "philosophy" would have a hard time defending itself
>as a practical tool for everyday life. Metaphysics ain't therapy. But
>the MOQ claims to explain insanity, among other things, and it claims to
>be a form of Pragmatism. So there's some reason to think that Rocky, or
>anyone else, might be able to "use" Pirsig's metaphysics. If the MOQ is
>a tool, then it's a map. Like a map, the MOQ won't get you there. It
>only shows the way.

Right, and can I also point out that Zen and the Art of Motorcycle
Maintenance wasn't really about bikes.

>The question of actual persons obtaining both sQ and DQ simultaneously
>certainly seems like a question about how to rightly live a life. Pirsig
>certainly addresses certain kinds of personal, cultural and historical
>conflicts. He talks about ritual, mysticism, morality, values, and even
>religion. He's mapped a territory that, I dare say, we ought to take
>quite personally.

Of course we should. In LILA Pirsig says the real Quality problem is the
Quality of his life. He's trying to figure out how to balance Dynamic and
static himself. His philosophy is supposed to be for real people, he's
trying to get away from academic aloofness that intimidates you into letting
other people do your thinking for you. He's a philosopher from the original
school. Socrates spent his days debating vital issues in the marketplace.
Lao Tzu applied his own advice on following the subtle path to personal
happiness and social harmony. The real motorbike you are working on is
yourself.

>In chapter 30 Pirsig describes the tension between static and Dynamic as
>a conflict between ritual and freedom. (As we discussed in the past, we
>are "determined" to the extent we are static and "free" to the extent
>that we open to DQ.) Naturally, his descriptions get us to re-imagine
>"ritual" and "freedom" with a whole new breadth of meaning.

I'm glad you re-read it because I think chp 30 is the key to the book. That's
where Pirsig ties the rest of the MOQ together by reconciling Dynamic
and static, or ritual and freedom.

Your summary was very good and there's no point in me just repeating it.
I would also want to stress that Pirsig is not against ritual/static in
itself. The buddhist monk does not avoid static patterns - he tries to get
them perfect. It is through the perfection of static that dynamic is
realized. You do not fix your bike by avoiding the problem, you fix it by
trying hard and caring about it, and by having the wisdom to create space
for Dynamic to lead the way.

David wrote:
>> "That's the whole thing: to obtain static and Dynamic Quality
>> simultaneously. If you don't have the static patterns of scientific
>> knowledge to build upon you're back with the cave man. But if you don't
>> have the freedom to change those patterns you're blocked from any
>> further growth."

And then Bodvar wrote:
>is no prescription of how to stand the suburban strain of keeping up
>with the Joneses.

I don't know if I'd use the word prescription but it is certainly
enlightening. You have to become a part of society before you can transcend
it. You have to have social values before you can have intellectual. When
you understand that the social level is not evil but a necessity, you stop
getting so upset about it and constructively sort out the essential social
values from the superfluous ones. It's a highly practical approach. The MOQ
clarifies the issues in the whole modern life problem and so it's very
helpful. Being able to define your problem is nine tenths of the
solution.

Perhaps there's a feeling that this everyday stuff is not for high-minded
thinkers. But MOQ has nothing to do with such attitudes. It
looks directly at what is happening without limiting itself to any
pre-established criteria about what is "allowed" in metaphysics.

>Some people talk about DQ as if it's the antidote
>to all evil, but it's a dangerous pursuit. Phaedrus (of ZMM) went
>all the way, and we know what that cost him. It resulted in a
>new world view, and for that I am him eternally grateful, but the
>naked DQ killed old Phaedrus. There is a biblical verse that says
>something about the impossibility of seeing God's countenance and
>live. It's something there ...if we say "Good's".

Well I'm not sure about the some people, but I think I've always been a
strong proponent of high quality static latching as a means to reach
dynamic. You have to have dynamic and static at the same time. You have to
keep up with society to a certain extent. The question we are pursuing is
"how do we achieve the balance between dynamic and static?" In phrasing it I
think David assumed that everyone understood that there is a dilemma there.
We should be trying to solve the dilemma, not merely restating it.

>In his second message Rocky tells about the philosophy professor
>who had given up on thinking and started enjoying lawn-mowing
>and tea. Except for the "giving up" quality, this is the very idea of
>Zen Buddhism. After having pursued the the grand visions one may turn
>to the menial tasks with a new attitude.
>
> Miraculous power and marvellous activity
> Drawing water and hewing wood.
>
> (Alan Watts: "The Way of Zen)

That's fair enough, but the important thing to note is that it is only _after_
having pursued the grand visions that this is the correct attitude. Perhaps
that is what Rocky's professor meant, but from the sound of things that
wasn't the case. It sounds more like the professor had failed to achieve
intellectual satisfaction, not that he had transcended it. The difference is
crucial.

The essence of Zen is summed up in the koan "eat when it's time to eat,
sleep when it's time to sleep, die when it's time to die".

If this professor had said "drink iced tea when it's time to drink iced
tea" then I would agree. But from the sounds of things he didn't. He just
said "drink iced tea". The essence of Zen does not lie in what you do, but
in when and how you do it. Right thought, right action, right time and all
that. If it is right that you drink iced tea then you should do so. However
drinking iced tea or drawing water in themselves are not evidence of a Zen
lifestyle, they are just static patterns. You do not release the arrow at
some prespecified time, you hold it tense until it releases you -- and you
certainly don't hold it for a while and then decide you can't be bothered
and give up.

Diana

PS. I've fixed my wordwrap Bo, I do hope your toothache is better too.

MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 17 2002 - 13:08:48 GMT