Hi All,
The defining of Pirsig’s Giant divides the group into
2 factions: Parts vs. Whole. Pirsig defines the Giant
as some pattern of values created by Social value. We
run into a problem when we pick out one Part of the
pattern and identify it as the Giant itself (Whole).
This false perspective can then lead some to think
“there are some evil individual “men”
somewhere who are exploiting them...” AND these ARE
the Giant. Granted, there are individuals who fit this
description (Gates & Murdoch) but perhaps it would be
more helpful to refer to them as small ‘g’ giants (or
'Jolly Green Giants'), Parts of the Whole. If we could
possibly slay the giant Microsoft (assuming we wanted
to), the Giant would still stand.
And so, once we identify the Giant how does Pirsig
suggest we deal with it?
In ZMM, Pirsig writes:
“A real understanding of Quality _captures_ the
system, tames it, and puts it to work for its own
personal use, while leaving one completely free to
fulfill his inner destiny.”(Ch.18)
In Lila, Pirsig reformulates this into MoQ terms:
“You free yourself from static patterns by putting
them to sleep. That is, you master them with such
proficiency, that they become an unconscious part of
your nature. You get so used to them you completely
forget them and they are gone. There in the center of
the most monotonous boredom of static ritualistic
patterns the Dynamic freedom is found.”(Ch.30)
And, as Dave observes, the only other alternatives to
this approach are lunacy, mysticism, and death.
Whenever we attempt to deal with the Giant from a
position outside of its pattern of values, we are
trading one set of static patterns for another ("bad
Karma chasing its tail”).
Mark B
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com/
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:21 BST