Dear Platt,
During my readings and re-readings of both ZAMM and LILA, it seems that each
is full of extremely subtle groupings of theses, antitheses, quandaries, and
, eventually conclusions. Sometimes the antitheses are posed by other
characters. Sometimes Pirsig, himself poses both the thesis and antithesis
of a given argument, although he elegantly spaces them throughout the books
to appear to be unrelated until the conclusion surfaces. Sometimes one or
more of these elements is the product of thought, sometimes, it is
demonstrated through the action of a specific character. Pirsig is extremely
clever in his use of classical dialectic approach albeit disguised in a
combination of plot and narrative, although his discussion of how he
constructs his writing (i.e. the re-shuffling of the order and importance of
various index cards which he reveals in the opening chapters of LILA) belies
his sly construction of the Q&A method. He never states that this is
purpose, but given the result, it is apparent to me that the reason for the
re-ordering of ideas is to produce the most powerful argument possible - one
that successfully lays waste to the most powerful counter-argument. His
elegant subtlety is one of the reasons that I have revered Pirsig as not
only philosophically important, but as a literary giant of the last half of
the twentieth century.
Although, I will be happy to oblige with some specific examples, I must beg
some additional time until I can reclaim my copy of LILA from my ex, or
obtain another copy so that I may be sure of my references.
Thank you for your thoughtful response to my arguments.
Regards,
The Bard
----- Original Message -----
From: Platt Holden <pholden@sc.rr.com>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 7:54 AM
Subject: Re: MD Overdoing the Dynamic Monthly Summary
> Hi The Bard:
>
> Roger has responded as I would have to your belief in the "natural
> goodness of the collective soul." So I won't repeat what he said much
> better than I could. But you wrote something else I hope you will clarify
> for me.
>
> > Although your response below was addressed to Rog, I am so disturbed by
> > your conclusions that I feel that I must respond. Regarding the
> > individual's role in Dynamic change, Pirsig uses the dialectic to
examine
> > all sides of the issue, often deliberately contradicting earlier
> > conclusions.
>
> Do you mean by "the dialectic" that Pirsig uses the Socratic method to
> make his points, or simply that he is logical? If the former it must be
> well disguised because I don't see it. Perhaps you could point out
> where in LILA he uses the Q&A method that Socrates made famous.
>
> I enthusiastically agree with what you said as follows:
>
> >The importance of the society vs. the individual is that the
> > individual may indeed be the catalyst ( or even the leader of change),
but
> > without a coalition of similar believers, nothing ever changes. In a
> > harmonic, synchronistic model of the Universe, the individual is the
> > messenger, who because of his receptiveness at a given moment in time,
> > perceives the kernel of a universal truth. If it hadn't been that
> > individual, it would have been another in another place and time. We
know
> > from history that revolutionary ideas are often perceived by various
> > individuals across the globe relatively simultaneously without any
apparent
> > connection between those individuals. The messenger is very important.
But
> > if he/she proceeds alone, that kernel of truth will be dismissed and no
one
> > will be the better for it until another messenger who seeks the
affirmation
> > of others emerges.
>
> But as I wrote to Roger, whereas you and he rightly point out the
> essential role of the collective, I put greater value on the individual
> "catalyst." I prefer to focus on the spark rather than the flame. I'll
even
> go out on a limb and assert that with the possible exception of the
> Founding Fathers, no group has ever originated any ideas of lasting
> value.
>
> Platt
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:46 BST