elephant wrote:
> My point would be,however, that whatever you or JPS may say, the authenticity/Bad
> faith distinction is a moral one: JPS does talk about what we *ought* to value
> doesn't he? (i.e. "freedom"). Not phoney, he'd hope, but moral none the less.
>
I've always thought that Sartre saw "freedom" as inducing vertigo (nausea). I
agree that Sartre would call the distinction between authenticity and bad faith a
"moral" one-- but I do not think that this would constitute an endorsement. After
all, what is "existential morality?" If a person knows something about
existentialism, the one thing they are likely to know is that, in existentialism,
"God is dead." I see Sartre's "freedom" as a means, not a motive. I have always
assumed that "God" is a word that means "motive" or "mover" more than "method" or
"means"-- ("The Way" is not "God" in Buddhism--- there is no "God" in Buddhism).
RMP is more Buddhist than Roman. But "Quality" does resemble "God" in a profound
and important way. "Quality" is a motive power-- it moves us to act. I see the
connection between Sartre and Pirsig in this way-- Sartre provides a means
(freedom) without a motive (God is dead). Pirsig provides a motive (Quality)-- and
this is where I could use some help. Does RMP provide us with any means or method
in the pursuit of Quality? I've always thought that his Metaphysics is profoundly
"out there" in that it lacks any method except, possibly, "look and observe
carefully." The Buddhists have sitting meditation, after all. What is the Way of
Quality? (A book title!) Let us consider our freedom-- after we confess our
Knowledge of Quality. What does our Freedom mean after such knowledge?
Regards,
Dan
------- End of forwarded message -------
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:30 BST