clark (clark@netsites.net)
Fri, 23 Jan 1998 05:33:34 +0100
----------
> From: Diana McPartlin <diana@asiantravel.com>
> To: Multiple recipients of <lilasqd@mail.hkg.com>
> Subject: LS Re: Principles--An aside
> Date: Thursday, January 22, 1998 4:10 PM
>
> lenchom@uwwvax.uww.edu wrote:
> >
> > Hi, LS.
> >
> > I am new to the group and have just picked up on the attempt
> > to hash out and organizing statement of Pirsig's view of Quality
> > and related issues. I have had some fun teaching Pirsig for
> > the past several years, and I am thinking that you might enjoy
> > the following classroom formulation of the static/dynamic
> > distinction that I've worked out with the help of my students:
> >
> > Static Quality:
> >
> > Pirsig says . . .
> >
> > "static good [is] derived from fixed laws and the traditions and
> > values that underlie them." It's "the essential structure of the
> > culture itself and defines it." It is "old and complex" and
> > "contains a component of memory;" that is, it's " what you normally
> > expect." It is conformity to an established patern of fixed values
> > and value objects." It is "quality of order" which we rely on to
> > "preserve our world." Through it, we can stave off chaos.
> >
> > Extrapolating, we might say that . . .
> >
> > Static quality is the great store of common sense identified with
> > and derived by experience, and it points the way to how we're
> > supposed to act and think, both in a constitutive and normative
> > sense. It's goodness gets codified into rules and regulations,
> > and it lies behind the conventions by which we live. It is the
> > force of stability and intelligibility. It makes sense; it is
> > settling. It is conservative, mature and associated with age.
> > Static quality is the avoidance of badness. It is the voice of
> > reason and custom; it is responsible. It's what permits us to
> > get to sleep at night.
> >
> > Dynamic Quality
> >
> > Pirsig says. . .
> >
> > "Dynamic good. . .is outside of any culture," and "cannot be
> > contained by any system of precepts [laws]." He calls it "the
> > pre-intellectual cutting edge of reality, the source of all things,
> > completely simple and always new." It comes "as sort of a surprise."
> > It is the "Quality of freedom, [and it] creates the world in which
> > we live."
> >
> > Extrapolating, we might say that. . .
> >
> > Dynamic Quality is prior to experience and can only be felt in the
> > associations it leaves behind. It has to do with what we like
> > as opposed to what we are supposed to do. It does not follow rules
> > and regulations, but is evidenced in the instinct of independence.
> > It is the force of change. It compells attention; it is stimulating
> > and intriguing. It is reformist, active, and stereotypically
> > associated with youth. Dynamic Quality finds its effect in the
> > disobedient pursuit of excellence. It is the voice of intuition
> > and discovery; it is revolutionary. It is what gets us up in the
> > morning.
> >
>
>
> Hi Mark
>
> Thanks for your contribution. Did you set this as a class asignment?
> You seem to have followed the same method as I did to write my
> dynamic-static principle, ie going through Lila esp chp 9 and trying to
> piece together everything Pirsig says about the two.
>
> What I've also tried to do was be absolutely ruthless and try and cut
> out everything that wasn't necessary to give a very concise explanation
> of dynamic and static. It would be interesting to see if you can take
> your extrapolations one stage further and try to make them as rigorous
> as possible.
>
> The other thing I notice about your explanations is that you've focused
> on the empirical aspects of Dynamic and static. That's fine and these
> are definitely important, but what's missing is that this Dynamic-static
> split also refers to the physical universe. I imagine that it wouldn't
> be too difficult to convince a class of students of the empirical side
> of Dynamic and static experience, but to convince them that this is the
> primary basis of reality might be a little harder. Also, you haven't
> mentioned anything about morality. Again, I image that is because it is
> an emotive issue and your students were probably less open to it.
>
>
>
> Diana
>
>
>
> --
> post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com
> unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com
> homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
>
>
Diana,
It seems that your struggle over the principles is slowly winding down so
maybe we now have time to pay attention to other aspects of the MOQ world
view.
Reading Mark's post almost compelled me to put forth an idea that has
been bothering me for some time. Reading the posts convinces me that there
are about as many conceptions of the Dynamic Quality idea as there are
squad members. It is confusing to me to try to sort out the approach that a
particular person is taking to DQ. Lila leaves a good bit of room for
interpretation. Particularly with regard to the pre-sentient/post-sentient
areas
What would you think of the idea of asking each member to write a short
statement defining what Dynamic Quality means to them, not with the idea of
coming up with a universally accepted definition, I doubt if we could do
that, but to give everybody an idea of the range of DQs that we are dealing
with. It would probably start a fierce debate but that is not bad and it
would certainly help my state of confusion.
Maggie's post just prior to yours suggests that she may have a similar
problem.
My contribution to the quote file:
"Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the argument that life is
serious" Brendan Gill
Also, as an editor you may enjoy this 'Pogo' poem:
"Do you herd sheep?" old Granma cried,
and Grandpa leapt with fright.
"That Grammers wrong." to me he sighed.
"Have you heard sheep is right."
Ken
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:39 CEST