Yes Geoff, and what I was trying to add in my
mailings was that, it is by being affected by Pirsig and
seeing how quality can be achieved in every day in our
own lives, that the true popularising will take
place.<br>That is, not by dogmatic repetition of Pirsig's actual
words, or adherence to any one or two books, but by
living true to one's own inner voices.<br>Keep on
posting y'all <br>(Hi Diana - don't feel you need to
reread or become a scholar to be able to comment, look
to your own sense of quality!<br>Sara
I think a popularizer of Pirsig are in fact his
many readers. My brother's friend recommended that I
read 'ZMM'. This 'word of mouth' allowed me to
discover the wonderful world of Pirsig and not only that
literature in general. <br><br>What I am saying is that just
normal readers can help spread the 'philosophies' of
Robert Pirsig by recommending it to people.<br><br>Of
course a popularizer could be more effective if it was
someone who was well known, although I think if every
normal reader, like you and me just gives people some
advice on what to read it could have the same effect as
a 'popular'
popularizer.<br><br>Thanks,<br>Geoff<br><br>(PS. I have just finished my exams.
Which is
excellent.)
Joao and Club.<br>I thought we had met before -
at the Lila Squad perhaps - but see that you are a
Wilson club member too. OK that's fine, you'll perhaps
have noticed me acting the Pirsig "mole" over
there.<br><br>You are right ...brutal volume of advertising... says
it and the Quality IDEA will possibly not make it as
a product on the marketplace and yet it will make
it somehow. When the time is ripe ideas spread as if
by magic, and not only 'intellectual patterns' but
knowledge in its widest sense, you have possibly heard
about the birds opening milk bottles and the monkey's
potato washing technique spreading over great distances
and across the seas. I can't see what other direction
evolution (in its widest sense) may take right now. I have
this my pet idea that I have shown at the CW site, but
for the benefit of those here I repeat it?
<br><br>Using a hundred year yardstick, a person from 1900
would be completely lost to-day, one from 1800 would
find 1900 a bit strange but manageable. A 1700 person
would recognize most tools and procedures in 1800
(except for the political changes) and so it goes until
there is no perceptibe changes - one from year 8oo
would find nothing new in 900 ...except for the people.
This makes a change/time curve that is almost flat
aeons and then slowly starting to rise around the
Renaissance - more at the Industrial Revolution - and having
become steeper and steeper ever since. There are more
new products (and procedures connected with them)
made during the last few years than throughout the
whole of history. I spoke about a person from 1900
being lost in 2000, but in the infotech branch one is
outdated if away for some months these days (I read about
one who was sacked after a long sick leave). Now, my
idea is that such sinus curves can't go on - it's
forbidden mathematically - there can't be infinitely much
change over no time. But what is there to stop it?
Innovation has become economy itself and the smallest sign
of abation sends shockwaves into the stock exchanges
and experts to talk about stagnation and make it
sound as if collapse is just around the
corner.<br><br>I could go on about this ..... how the Western
world seems locked into a relentless race and tries to
convert all to its progress religion by first creating
the fear of poverty (its "sin") and hope for
development (salvation) and can't comprehend how - for
instance - Islamic fundamentalists refuse to be
converted......but will stop. My idea is of course that the Quality
Metaphysics not only explains the West/Islamic conflict, but
also represent a change for change to stop. How? I
will try to explain, but for now close and join you in
"..you can sort of tell these things." <br>Bo
Hello Sara, Bo, Joao & all,<br><br>I’ve been
keeping away from potential discussions, as I really need
to reread both Lila and ZMM. <br><br>Sara, I like
what you said about the way one could affect others by
living truthfully himself. We express ourselves and
affect others just by being amongst them, just
unintentionally.<br><br>I enjoy reading your postings. I’m also rereading
ZMM and hope to be able to add more to the discussion
soon.<br><br>Diana
Hallo Joao<br>Nice to here another voice here -
where are you writing from - Brazil? <br>(I have a
fascination with Bahia as I co-own a saveiro buiklt in
Cajaiba)<br>I agree everyoe knows what Pirsig is on about - but
few recognise the importance or get to the stage
where it affects their everyday life. I think that is
Bo's concern. <br>How can more people feel EMPOWERED
by their innate inner knowledge of QUALITY. I am
starting to understand how expanding our own versions of
living life with quality as the centre and goal will
lead to a better world for everyone.<br>The
subject/object split has been an extrememly useful tool in
thinking and human development so far, but we now need to
move towards a more 'harmonious', all encompassing
belief system.<br>(And yes the s/object system is a
belief system too!, contrary to scientific dogma)<br>I
know this sounds rather mystical , but it's the best
way I can describe the radical change at the
moment!<br>fuzzy headedness from Sara
Hi Bo, Sara & all,<br><br>I agree that Pirsig
needs a popularizer. The brutal volume of advertising
that hits people every day makes it difficult for them
to discover hidden treasures like Pirsig's books. A
major obstacle is the *availability* that is needed to
read his books, as there's no stopping in daily
routines.. and there's a lot of resistance to face something
like ZMM or Lila, which can have a profound effect on
the way you.. on "your way". <br><br>I guess that the
ones who will enjoy him the most are those who already
know what he's talking about.. well, maybe everyone
does. <br><br>In the end, I'm sure he'll be
remembered.<br>You can sort of tell these things.<br><br>Joao
HI Bo and all (all 2 of us regulars!!??? say
something, anything , someone else, PLEASE!!!)<br><br>Im
back from a sailing week (as mate, and singing
entertainer on a charter ship on the Waddenzee for the
Hemelvaart holidays)... and ready to do a bit of thinking
again - action is necessary for the body, but thought
seems required to stop killing myself with exestential
angst or boredom at the seeming meaninglessness of it
all. <br>Hence my Pirsig interest.<br>About occultism.
I think we all have to keep as open minds as
possible. As Metaphysics is supposed to be where we expand
our human understanding of the universe around us and
within us... so UFOs and other strange reports should be
looked at. <br>My own other focus at the moment is to
look to the very strange world of my own psyche. My
own 'inner space' via dreams and learning Jungian
'active imagination' to try and access more of my human
potential*** through working out our neuroses and unhealthy
thinking and behaviour patterns learned in childhood and
through overcoming our (modern) culture which "recognises
creativity only conditionally" (Dr C.P Estes, author
+jungian analyst and storyteller).<br>*** I mention this
as I think in order to move on as humans, and
achieve a higher state of being, authors such as Pirsig
and Wilson are key, but it's by each individual
striving and contuinually living a creative lif, true to
one's inner direction that fuels this process. Being
true to ones inner directions and strengths on a daily
basis, and, when necessary, bravely facing ridicule,
misunderstanding or opposition of one's own upbringing, society or
tradition is key.<br>This may sound rather flimsey, but i
think I'm on to something!.<br>SO I'd say it's not so
much a case of finding a way to popularise Pirsig
DIRECTLY that is needed, but giving the message that what
inspires you is worth while, whatever it is. If you follow
those sparks of inpiration, with hard work and daily,
plodding meticulous grind to keep the bring something
(anything)into the world you will bring the world further. - so
long as you remain critical and true to the difficult
process of keeping the creative process clear.<br>This
can be realised in the simplest or most complicated
ways. Living your life as mother or hairdresser
'truthfully' is going to have its effect on the world. Not so
much as a great scientist or writer perhaps, but still
its important to sanction peoples individual
creativity.<br>OK Im rambling here - time to go and sand a schooner
some more... but I hope I communicate some of my
optimism about positive change through person action -
however small and seeminlgy insignificant our works may
seem in the big universe!<br><br>My message: Pirsig is
one of many voices of truth and beauty. We should all
try to listen to those wierd rumbings inside and
outside, and make something heard, according to your
special voice.<br>Sara
Pirsig fans.<br>Internet discussions seem to have
only two modes: full ahead and dead stop. I
participate in another site (Colin Wilson) which is
overflowing while this one is dried up, but no problem it
gives me the opportunity to deliver another
monologue.<br><br>The said Colin Wilson (British born 1931 "The
Outsider" his first book) reminds me of Robert Pirsig
because he primarily writes to express ideas and is
perhaps a better writer in the sense that he have
received bad reviews and still go on writing. As an
original thinker, however, Pirsig is light-years ahead but
was too self-critical to publish anything after the
tepid reception of LILA. Yet, it was perhaps the wiser
thing to do - not to build a recluse reputation, but
from a deep quality sense. He has said it, no new
argument will persuade anyone who did not get the message
through ZAMM and LILA, and writing for the sake of
writing is not his thing. <br> Wilson has written about
many phenomena: mostly what one would call occult, his
last venture was about UFOs, while Pirsig has not
touched such stuff (except for the ghost story of ZMM and
the Dharmakaya Light of LILA). There are those who
don't like his "afterword" in (some editions)of ZAMM,
guess it is his wonderings about where Chris went
(after death) that was regarded unseemly. <br> But can a
metaphysics - which is supposed to cover everything there is
- avoid occultism? Or is it so that even the occult
is a subject/ object fallout? That they are observed
don't help - it's merely data. Over at the CW site I
have prayed for Wilson to "discover" Pirsig and start
popularizing his Quality Metaphysics; nobody beats Wilson in
that aspect, but can the MoQ be popularized?
<br>Enough question marks.<br>Bo
Update,<br><br>I have now completed 2 of my 5
exams.<br>English and Economics have been completed,<br>Accounting,
Math with Stats and Classical Studies
left.<br><br>I've delayed the re-reading untill after the
exams.<br><br>Well I'll get back to this thing after all my exams
have finished<br><br>Untill then,<br>Geoff
Hi KA<br>You did not get any response to your
question about the murder of Chris Pirsig, but I'm afraid
that I have no new information on the matter other
than what is found in the afterword of some editions
of the "Zen and the Art..." so as far as I know it's
an unsolved case. I am grateful to have received a
few letters from Robert Pirsig, but have never had
the nerve to ask ...although I believe he wouldn't be
offended. I will at the next chance so stand by.
<br>Sincerely<br>Bo Skutvik
GOOOD LUCK with your studies Geoff - what's your
subject(s)?<br>You didn't mention how you got on with ZMM the 2nd
time around - any flashy, quick comments in between
cramming?<br>I havent read it for ages either, and would be
interested in what you got out of it this time.<br>We can
also be critical of Pirsig - maybe you found certain
bits not so riviting???<br><br>May GOODness be aware
to us all (also those going in to the exam
hall!)<br><br>Sara
Hi Pirsig Club.<br>We suddenly got relatives
visiting from the USA and I had to act the host, but now
things are back to normal.<br><br>For Geoff.<br>Stay
with your school work, we want many (Pirsig)doctors in
our midst.<br><br>Sara! <br>You may remember your
comments to my "commentys"? Anyway this is what I started
to write before the relatives arrived.
<br><br>Confusing! Perhaps. I spent such a long time at the
moq.org.discussions that I take too much for granted. About the
euthanasia issue my opinion is the one about a "last will".
If a written <br>statement is made - OK, but I still
can't see the connection to death penalty. Our
(Norwegian)"Life Testament" is an arrangement initiated by a
movement called "The Human Ethics", but is just about
stopping life-prolonging treatment.<br><br>(Sara): <br>You
said <<the notion of truth is THE major
Intellectual pattern .....>> (snip) I think I am missing
the point rather here! And I think <br>it is a
central one! Can you expand on this difficult subject of
TRUTH and its relation to the 'intellectual level' a
bit? Do you mean <br>that TRUTH exists as the highest
value (Q) in intellectual terms? Perhaps I am still
thinking is Subject /Object terms too much to grasp these
points fully?<br><br>(Me):<br>Thanks for asking me to
expound on this point.<br>You know the paradox that
whatever one says, truth receedes a step back. The
statement ..there is no truth .. becomes a new "truth" etc.
Objectivity counter subjectivity (SOM)is seemingly foolprof,
but here its logic fails and is a dangerous path for
those who demands consistency. In my opinion this was
what broke poor Phaerus of ZAMM. SOM is a mighty tool
but it's like the Sorcerer's Apprentice story, he
knew how to start but not how to stop. P. became its
victim, but somehow he had this vision from the "insane"
no-man's land from where he saw that SOM is a myth of its
own. <br><br>"Truth" a myth?! Isn't that a slippery
slope back into barbarity? Yes, it is. The notion of
what is objective in contrast to subjective is the one
greatest evolutionary step and in my opinion the
"Intellectual level" of the MoQ. This is my interpretation of
the MoQ and something that not all agree with me
about (possibly not Pirsig himself who said he did not
see what it was supposed to solve). For me it solved
EVERYTHING!<br><br>If the "true/false" distinction is the whole
Intellectual Level - and not merely one single intellectual
pattern - it also means that the Q-evolution is in the
process of shaking the intellectual "chains" and that is
also the natural development according to the MoQ
tenets. <br><br>OK this is more than enough. It may sound
as if I left the moq.org to start a new sect over
here, but no, Pirsig is the leading light. <br>Bo
Sorry for not posting lately.<br><br>The reason
is that I have exams approaching next week so I have
been hard at study.<br><br>After next week and a bit,
I will be able to post but until then I'll just
have to lurk.
Halooo...<br>Is there anybody out there?<br>Was
it something I wrote, or is it holiday time for
everyone?<br>Has noone anything to say or discuss about
Porsig/meaning of life and the unioverse and everything? <br>I
have just reread my last message and realise that some
of it is garbage, and I dont like the rather
attecking tone I have have used. <br>Time to try and THINK
and communicate better. I am genuinerly interested in
these important questions and value the chance to
discuss thingsa on this forum.<br><br>Anyway, hallo to
all Pirsig/Philosophisers<br>from Sara
A brief, first reply to your interesting, but
confusing mail! Call me thick, but I found it difficult to
follow your point! A few initial points and
questions:<br>For me, the <br><<moral right AGAINST the use
capital of punishment>> Is comparible to euthanasia
or 'death pill' as an example of the willful taking
of life outside of absolute necessity (because no
one is threatened by a prisoner, and there may be a
medical cure or miracle to save a
patient).<br><br>Society condoning death outside of necessity is a tricky
reality to maintain, to say the least. Where would it
end/// how to control?? Or must I stop looking from the
society viewpoint all together?<br><br>I guess it is more
useful to look from the individual level. If society
grants the individual supreme rights over their bodies,
(as they should, I think) it should not be illegal to
commit suicide, for any reason. But society cannot be
expected to provide the 'death pill' for an unhappy
teenager or depressed housewife in a mid-life crisis (like
myuself!). Or should it? My man thinks (unconventionally)
that society should, as it is the individual's right
to decide.<br>-------------------------<br>Anyway,
what do you mean by "life's testament", and what is
the <<heroic act>>? Sounds like I need to
do/make it too!<br>-----------------------<br>Funnily
enough, I meant the 'natural' idea the other way, ie:
everything can be seen as "natural" on a wide level, and so
it is not a good measure to decide whether an act is
natural or innatural! This positive or negative result
doesn't matter, as the conclusion is the same!<br><br>You
said <<the notion of truth is THE major
Intellectual pattern - Q-intellect that is, in the
subject/object world one is forced to alternate between
subjective (beliefs) and objective (knowledge) and both
leads into blind alleys.>><br><br>I think I am
missing the point rather here! And I think it is a
central one! Can you expand on this difficult subject of
TRUTH and its relation to the 'intellectual level' a
bit? Do you mean that TRUTH exists as the highest
value (Q) in intellectual terms? Perhaps I am still
thinking is Subject /Object terms too much to grasp these
points fully?<br>-------------------<br>Interesting as
our human myths and legends are (I include the bible,
as well as the more distant Norse or Scot or Red
Indian, and the more recent Comic Books and feature
films) I was trying to talk about a notion of the
absalute 'quality' that I see as being above or beyond
finite nate of a 'will' or a particular 'god' or
'truth'. WHich is why I said<br><<I dont see this
universal concept as attributed with answers for precise
human quandries.>><br>Put more positively, the
'quality' response should be soulght at all times to all
questions, but we have to find the answers with our own
fallible, individual wee
selves!<br>-------------------<br>Hope this is a bit clearer. <br>Language is
such a
slippery thing! <br><br>GOOD thoughts to all Pirsig fans,
<br>from Sara
Geoff said:<br><br>>Bo, I find how you said
that society and >technology has advanced
interesting. <br>>Vegetable-like Humans without the
technoloy >currently available would not be able to
survive >and in a way this is intefering with God's
(if >you beleive in him/her/it) or Natures natural
>path. It is in fact inhuman to keep a person >alive
that has no possiblilty to recover.<br><br>Hi
Geoff.<br>My opinion is that it should be possible for the
individual to make up a last will to the effect of actively
putting an end to one's life (not merely as it is in this
country to ask for the treatment to stop), but for those
who refuse it should not become a rule.<br><br>
************<br><br>Hi Sara <br>You had so many good and subtle points
(a true philosopher)that I better answer in a
roundabout way. Yes, in LILA Pirsigs says that society has
no moral right to use capital punishment, but that's
not exactly the point here. <br><br>I agree that
nothing human is "natural" (except our biology) and can
hardly be a measure. The above (for Geoff) is my opinion
on the issue: if no written consent is available no
general "killing off", but in my opening piece I used
Netherlands' law (proposal?) as an example without really
knowing what it implies. Can you tell? Re. the MoQ slant
on it all is that this issue is the "social value"
at work. What (in Norway) is called "life's
testament" is an heroic act. I have done so myself and
regard it as my DUTY - a dominant social pattern!
<br><br>Finally you said: <br>>Looking from a more cosmic
angle, I think God, >or truth or beauty or Good or
universality or >oneness or QUALITY (whatever you call it,
but >dont be fooled, we all believe in something!)
is >an all-encompassing wider notion than even
>nature. <br><br>Yes, definitely, the very Q idea is that
all existence is based on "belief" (though not in
SOM's "subjective" sense)which is another word for
value-perception at distinct levels. Inorganic belief, Biological
belief ..etc. At the evolutionary top floor - Intellect
- the beliefs become rather complicated - yet
...<br><br>>And though we are part of the universe, and have
>glimpses of beauty, etc, we cannot ever 'know it >all'
as we are just small, fallible, bits of a >wider
'truth' which is allways there and outside >of the
mortal or transient. <br><br>Er..well the notion of
truth is THE major Intellectual pattern - Q-intellect
that is, in the subject/object world one is forced to
alternate between subjective (beliefs) and objective
(knowledge) and both leads into blind alleys. <br><br>>I
dont find it useful or meaningful to attribute >a
'will' or a pre-defined 'way' to this notion >of
God/QUALITY.<br>>I dont see this universal concept as attributed
>with answers for precise human quandries.<br><br>May I
add a very general and perhaps irrelevant note on
your God/Quality "aggregate" which is most apt IMO.
The gods of the myths, be it Greek or Norse or
whatever, were persons with wills of their own, but then
everything in their universe was WILL, they simply had no
notion of any objective realm beyond the subjects. This
is so horribly important in the understanding of the
Quality idea. My - um - belief is that even the mosaic
God was such an universal will, but that the emerging
intellect (which in Greece gave rise to the
truth/false=objective/subjective)resulted in the God/World split of
Christianity. This is
of such enormous proportions that a cultural history
could be written on it, but this is the limit that the
Yahoo demon allows. <br>Thanks for reading.<br>Bo
Not that it's going to change anything, but were Chris Pirsig's killers ever
"brought to justice"? I've not been able to find anything about that on the
Internet.<br><br>KA
Yes, it seems I am reading ZMM again. <br>I think
I missed out a whole lot things the first way
through and I am now to years older.<br>So I'll give it
another try. <br><br>It is late so I better go,<br>Good
day/night to all.<br><br>Thanks,<br>Geoff
(continued)<br>The rise of the euthanasia
question I see as a manifestation of the collective
(social) value and the uncanny feeling we experience in
its wake is because social value cannot fully be
harmonized to "individual worth" (intellectual value). This
again because the social level is more fundamental than
the intellectual one and will always appear as alien
to the latter. <br> Well then, what does the quality
idea have to say about the actual issue? Is it good or
bad? One moment please. First of all the MOQ
introduces value as the ground-stuff of existence and that
"good" is the - at any time - uppermost level which is
to say that nothing is outright bad, but that the
next lower level will be regarded as such by the
upper. So if the present "individual right" is
identified as (one of the chief patterns of) MoQ's
Intellectual level and the "anti-individual forces" (for lack
of better) is MoQ's Social level, the picture
becomes clearer. As each level is the "parent" to the one
above, we also see that individual value
(Intellect)can't act the cuckoo that pushes the other out of the
nest. IMO this removes the fear that this (self-chosen
death) means means a slippery-slope back to barbarism.
<br> One last round? The individual as equal to
"intellectual value" sounds a bit strange, but that's because
in the subject-object universe a human being is a
biological organism endowed with consciousness and free will
- "mind" for short - in contrast to other organisms
not so well-equipped. This sounds like a noble view
at first, but it soon reveals ugly sides, the one in
question here is that a demented person is removed from
the mind realm and reduced to animal - or vegetable -
status. In the MOQ however, there is no such matter/mind
chasm and no individual rise or fall from grace. Value
is Reality and the Intellectual level is the human
realm, be the individual ever so "reduced". <br> Thus
the accusation of it being some undercover return of
nazism/racism (with its recognition of the collective (social
value) misses the point completely, but many critics of
Pirsig's "LILA" centred on this aspect. Thanks for
reading<br>Bo
Hi Sara and Geoff and all.<br>Thanks for the
response. My messages aren't much of a dialogue rather like
a Moses down from the mountain so I understand that
Sara had trouble in finding anything to say, but would
you two forgive me if I try to finish my piece before
turning to special aspects of it? There will as usual be
some hefty jumping forth and back between the issue at
hand and philosophical observations. <br> <br>The
first instalment ended with my claim that our present
outlook becomes absurd when things are pursued to the
end. Absurdity usually occurs when the model one
thinks along doesn't match observations (ref. the Greek
physics and its famous absurdities/paradoxes) This
indicate that we have an outdated model of reality (aka
metaphysics), but let me return to the present situation.
Officially we - the Western world - holds up one dominating
value called "human rights" which for all practical
purposes means the individual's right at the expense of
the collective. Consequently the latter have become
something negative - if not outright evil and when the
question of a "death pill" comes up we alternate between
seeing it as the ultimate human right and a return of
the nazi "final solution". <br> In LILA Pirsig
despairs over ..a metaphysical argument has to be resolved
at the end of each sentence.. (when in the
borderland between two metaphysics) so there is no way to
tell if "euthanasia" is good or bad in SOM-land seen
from MOQ-land. I will have to return the basic and
present the Quality Metaphysics (as I see it) and go on
from there,<br> Obviously, values clash, but we have
no way of discerning between them, primarily because
values aren't objective and "dissectable", but also
because they operate in the same dimension; if one comes
another must go. But all this is changed by the new
reality model called "Metaphysics of Quality" (MOQ)
presented by Robert M. Pirsig. At the basic level because
value is existence itself, but also because there are
four static levels of which operate simultaneously and
interdependently. From bottom upwards: Inorganic, Biological,
Social and Intellectual. <br> Pirsig's account of how
the present valueless world view which he calls
"subject/object-metaphysics" (SOM) developed is too long to be repeated here,
but it started with the early Greek philosophers and
have continued off and on until the present time when
the Western world is so completely immersed in it
that it is "it all". Much criticism (of Pirsig's work)
is a denial of there being any SOM, but back to the
particular. <br>(the robot found my message too long so a
third instalment will follow immediately)<br>Bo
Hi Geoff<br>Good to 'hear' your voice again! No
'thanks' necessary, anyway, I'm enjoying taking part in
this site, and its not yours alone anyway, so dont get
all propriatorial:) (sarcastically!)<br>About nature
and God... As far as I see it, we humans are all
'natural' and part of the universe's unfolding story, so
our medical advances are also part of natures plan,
including keeping people alive when they're in a coma or
very ill for long periods. But I dont think the "it's
natural" or "not natural" arguments give us an answer as
to what should be done, or what is right or wrong at
any one time.<br>It is very hard to give sweeping
statements.Ever. WHO says that the so-called vegetable might not
miraculously 'wake up' one day, or less amazingly, but
significantly, by continuing to exist, provide scientific
answers to medical problems, or other importance for
other human beings? The fact that you dont believe in
miracles, can't predict the future, or see a point in that
persons existance is not reason enough to kill
them.<br>Most importantly, I believe is addressing the
dangerous question of who can take the role of decision
maker in ending life? My knee-jerk response is: NO ONE,
that's partly why death sentenses are wrong. <br>We are
fallible beings, the killing would be prone to corruption
and misuse (like all human activities). Who sets the
bordelines? How incapable is incapable? How much pain is
'insufferable'? We cant even quantify pain exactly - its
subjective. And that's the troulbe. The whole issue is
exptremely subjective. And so it should be! Its about life
and death after all!<br><br>As Pirsig said, (roughly)
if they aren't a threat to you or society, no one
has a right to kill another, even a convicted
murderer in prison. I do understand the difference when a
chronic pain sufferer says 'please help me to die'... but
the trouble is, even the least corrupt, caring mortal
can't judge the 'correct' point of giving the killing
poison. There is no 'correct point'.<br><br>Looking from
a more cosmic angle, I think God, or truth or
beauty or Good or universality or oneness or QUALITY
(whatever you call it, but dont be fooled, we all believe
in something!) is an all-encompassing wider notion
than even nature. And though we are part of the
universe, and have glimpses of beauty, etc, we cannot ever
'know it all' as we are just small, fallible, bits of a
wider 'truth' which is allways there and outside of the
mortal or transient. <br>I dont find it useful or
meaningful to attribute a 'will' or a pre-defined 'way' to
this notion of God/QUALITY. <br>I dont see this
universal concept as attributed with answers for precise
human quandries.<br><br>I'm still thinking about your
piece Bo, where's part 2?<br><br>Sara
Hi Bo, Sara and other lurkers,<br><br>I read both
of your posts found them both interesting.
<br><br>Bo, I find how you said that society and technology
has advanced interesting. <br>Vegetable-like Humans
without the technoloy currently available would not be
able to survive and in a way this is intefering with
God's (if you beleive in him/her/it) or Natures natural
path. It is in fact inhuman to keep a person alive that
has no possiblilty to recover.<br><br><br>I will
leave it as that at the moment, <br>I look forward to
your second post Bo and I thank you Sara for your
posting as well<br>Thanks,<br>Geoff
Hi Bo<br>Sorry to have remained unresponsive. I
enjoyed reading and thinking about your message. I have
also been reading your personal philosophical notes...
but didn't have anything meaningful to communicate
back, so remained dumb (my specialty). You were right
about my being considered outward going by many - a
real socialite in the old days - but dont worry about
your being an old fogie, it's what's inside that
counts!<br>Although I don't listen to the news much, your note about
euthanasia meant I actually read the papers, I was
interested in the 'kill pill' options being considered here
in the Netherlands. I think the way to use such an
'end it all' option is still rather vague, and only
intended for the aged, who are in severe pain, but it
certainly opens up a can of wriggling worm-like ideas to
wrestle with. Who can decide who is allowed to kill
themselves? Like with hanging, wont there always be
mistakes?<br> Won't 'god'(or beauty or quality or ultimate
truth) be angry at humans for defying the gift of
life?<br>This new law, or by-law, fits with NL 'laissez faire'
approach generally. Its not really being openminded, but
allowing others to choose for themselves whether to smoke
dope, go to a whore, etc. (Infact these are not
actually legal practises here, but are 'tolerated' within
strict limits). Despite some international cliche
hurling, the dutch are not over-the-top, law stretching
folk, but very, very democratic... to the point where
most are dully bourgeois (the opposite to openminded
in my opinion!)<br>So they have achieved a high
level of social quality in their country, and intend to
be as fair to all as possible. SO it makes sense
that they would consider the personal wishes of
severly ill people<br>I'm off the clean off some of the
muck I collected helping friends on their 'platbodem'
shiptoday, and motorbiking in the rain on muddy roads... I
look forward to reading your mail in more
detail.<br>Sara
Hi Pirsig Club members.<br>As no-one else posts I
have to start talking to myself (a sure sign of old
age). In my reply to Sara (Caledonia) I touched upon
Holland's law on "assisted death" (euthanasia) which has
raised a great interest here in Norway, and a weekly
radio program called "The Value Bourse" devoted one
entire emission on it. The gathered experts were
extremely vague - naturally - because this is a terribly
sensitive area, but a philosophy worth it's pay must be
willing to say something about anything so I wrote a
letter to the said program where I made some MOQ
(Metphysics of Quality) reflections around the issue. The
following is an edited version of it: <br><br>
************<br><br>Up to now we have had a relatively simple attitude
towards the "premature death" problem, be it
self-afflicted or helped by other or - most accentuated -
sanctioned by society. It is unworthy a modern welfare
state. Full stop! Looking back on history and the
cultures when this was normal conduct, we attributed it to
the harsh conditions that made it necessary for the
individuals to yield to (the demands of) their society. This
is the rational explanation of which communism is
the epitome: The economical conditions determinate
everything, all "evaluations" are just hot air. The people of
old did not look upon it that way (naturally -
otherwise they would not have followed the tradition),
rather sacrificed themselves when their time was up
because it was considered BEST thing to do. However - as
said - by the growing humanitarian consciousness this
gradually became regarded as inhuman, something that the
welfare state was supposed to make an end to. Medical
improvements were to keep people healthy until the end and the
society would provide for all needs unto the same end.
What the end would be like wasn't exactly defined.<br>
This is a absurdly compressed version of a
many-thousand year development. There may have been societies
with no self-sacrifice however marginal the
conditions, and other that sacrificed human beings freely in
all kinds of rituals, my point is that TO THAT AGE it
was the best thing to do. Now, if we for a moment
adopt the modern premises, the ECONOMIC conditions have
altered gradually, but we of today are the first to have
changed the BIOLOGICAL course of things to an extent that
it confronts us with a new indignity: Vegetable-like
human beings tucked away in institutions who everyone
silently hope will die, but about whom everyone keep up
the verbal pretences as well as denying them death.
The much sought for medical progress has become a
nightmare, not for society which has made it an industry,
but for the individuals themselves. This is a paradox
of enormous proportions. <br> We know that paradoxes
flourish when the model one thinks along doesn't fit
observations (ref. Greek physics and its many paradoxes) This
strongly indicates that we have an outdated model of
reality and that warning bells and whistles are blaring.
<br><br> ****************<br><br>End of part 1, part 2
will follow soon.
Hi Sara and all Pirsigeans.<br>Holland seems to
be Pirsig's most fertile ground beside Scandinavia,
wonder why. It looks like a pioneer country in many
respects - the last being the euthanasia approval which I
think is a wise step, but one that our bigoted pundits
condemn out of hand: it will lead to mass murder, it
sounds. Sensitive stuff though. <br><br>Re. your
omplaints about judging things properly I don't know if the
MOQ can provide a patent tool for particular
problems, many become disappointed by such a statement, the
Quality idea sounds like such a measuring rod - but IMO:
The thing that counts is to find the MEANING to what
happens. I mean, one may suffer all kinds of
disappointments, but they are tragedies only to the point they are
regarded pointless, once one sees a meaning, everything
can be endured - even gladly. <br><br>It may sound as
if I(want to make it sound)was such a profound
thinker when young, but in a general way I was haunted by
the absurdity of what RMP calls the subject/object
metaphysics (at that time I knew of no SOM of course, but
thought it was the way reality had been created). I can't
elaborate here, but the "mind/matter"-dualism robs ALL
existence of meaning. Then I had this my quality-like
insight that at first seemed like a revelation, but
slowly scared me when meeting blank stares (I don't
blame anyone) and for years I went around with the
dread of being insane. That's why the meeting with
Pirsig was such an enormous relief; finally one other
person with ideas like my own only much clearly
expressed. In another form admittedly, but
recognizable.<br><br>And finally here is the point of my "meaning"
agument. To me ZMM - and later the fullfledged MOQ of LILA
- changed absurdity into meaning. How/why? That's
the difficult part to convey, but I will go on trying
<br><br>It's easy to sound like a guru in writing, many are
disappointed upon meeting this shy and awkward person in
real-time settings, but one of the reliefs of the MOQ is
that the intellectual (writing) me is every bit as
real as the biological and social me. Your
depreciatory description of yourself may be just the opposite;
you are possibly regarded the most outgoing and
sociable person around. Anyway the activities you tell
about sound positive and constructive
(meaningful)enough for me, particularly the restoration of the
wooden schooner and sailing with it.<br>You will be all
right Sara ...You can sort of tell these things. <br>Bo
Hi Bo<br>I agree with your description of how the
MOQ kicks the chair from under other, conventional
philosophy, i see RP as giving the beautiful framework for a
new, all- inclusive way of dealing with life. <br>As I
said earlier: I have always had problems 'judging'
things - i.e. trying to figure out if 'this' is better
than 'that'... and consequently often come to a 'brick
wall' whilelooking at my life and making decisions:
whether it is study, work, plans, people around me, love
life, it seems like everything sometimes! <br>This lack
of ability to judge situations and people,has meant
my feeling unable to continue my projects/jobs in
life, with the ultimate result in a serious personal
breakdown recently, resulting from my self-image reaching
bottom. <br>I felt like a total failure despite having
refused to set up my own 'success' to judge myself by, by
relying on others to support and direct me and living in
an 'all or nothing' outlook. My adult life has all
been about 'dynamic' bursts of energy in several
directions (from Fine Art,to wooden schooner restoration and
sailing for the last 5 years), but I seem to lack the
skills to make the necessary 'static latching' to get me
to build on my creative experiences and
achievements!<br>I guess what I'm saying is Pirsig's approach and
writing style has encouraged me to personally see the
psychological repercussions of dynamic and static quality, and
am trying to use VALUE to heal myself!<br>Anyway,I'm
now believe in the positive power of practising calm
'quality' judgement in all spheres, and am trying to get on
with living a positive, constructive life. Not at all
easy, for someone who can always find an excuse for
themselves or others around them as to why things are
happenning.<br>I FEEL that you and RP are right in saying that we
all know what is quality innately, but I'm finding it
hard to access that instinctual nature. Too much
bourgeois 'civilisation' getting in the way, probably.
<br>I'm looking for tips on how to implememt MOQ on a day
to day level. <br><br>HELP!/any ideas or thoughts
anyone?/<br><br>lots of positive vibes (as the hippies used to
say)<br><br>from Sara (alias Caledonia)
Hi Geoff and Pirsig fans.<br>Thanks for the
welcome words, the "Balasoglou" name struck a note with
me so now I remember your presence at the
moq.discuss site <br><br>Yes, the MOQ discussion soon became
terribly profound - I was possibly part of that
development even if I tried to remind people about Pirsig's
word about ....reality, which is value is understood
by every infant. <br><br>I may reveal that the
history of the LILA SQUAD and its entries is soon to be
published as a printed book: "Lila's Child" by Dan Glover
-possibly with a foreword by Robert pirsig himself. You
wrote:<br><br>>I created this group as an alternative from
>MOQ.org discussion list. <br>>I think the general aim
of this group is to >discuss at a leisurely pace
the philosophies and >ideals of RP (rather then
the somewhat >seriousness of MOQ) <br><br>I see
the Quality Metaphysics as the epitome of the
philosophy and ideal of RP, but "Zen and the Art..." (ZAMM)
seems to attract more readers than the MOQ steeped
"LILA". <br><br>>I have full repect for MOQ but I felt
it was >just a bit to advanced for a person my
age (who >has never officially studied
philosophy.).<br><br>To have studied philosphy is no prerequisite for
thinking about existence - to the contrary. In the
beginning when (completely) obsessed with Pirsig's ideas I
tried to raise the interest of the philosophy faculties
at universities, but as with bishop and saints, true
thinkers are shunned by the philosophologists. They
believe that Pirsig is another world saviour and the MOQ
another sect - "Moral Rearmament" preferably.
Understandably too, the MOQ kicks the ground off from under
academical philosophy and who wants to undermine one's means
of living?<br>Keep posting.<br>Bo
Hi Bo,<br><br>Thanks for visiting my humble
discussion group.<br><br>I created this group as an
alternative from MOQ.org discussion list. <br>I think the
general aim of this group is to discuss at a leisurely
pace the philosophies and ideals of RP (rather then
the somewhat seriousness of MOQ) <br><br>I have full
repect for MOQ but I felt it was just a bit to advanced
for a person my age (who has never officially studied
philosophy.).<br><br>I was a member for a short time. I found the list
to be interesting but some things went straight past
me.<br><br>I had read some of your work previously and in fact
I used some of your essay for an assignment I did
last year on Robert Pirsig.<br><br>I hope that you
might read this message and would like to wish you luck
on your 're-entry' onto the world of Metaphysics of
Quality.<br>In fact you could compare your re-entry with Pirsig
own re-entry in ZMM. <br><br>Well thanks for reading
and I hope we can keep discussing. There is a lot
that I could learn from you.<br><br>Geoffrey
Balasoglou
Hello "enlightenedphilosopher"<br>Congratulations
with your site which I found just recently. Being a
survivor from the original "Lila Squad" (now moq.org)and
exhausted from more that three years of intense discussion
I planned to stay away from Internet groups, but a
few months of "convalescence" and the quality feeling
have started to return. From what I have read of the
entries till now it's not been so much discussion of his
ideas as a recognition of him as a writer and that's
very well. I see no point in keeping my identity
hidden and for those who have searched the Net for info
on Pirsig may have found my essay "The Quality
Event" at
<br><br><a href=http://home.online.no/~skutvik/
target=new>http://home.online.no/~skutvik/</a><br><br>It is from 1995-6 and even
if the said discussion
have deepened my understanding in the meantime the
piece still gives a fairly good rendering of Pirsig's
MOQ. I have thought of updating/amending it, but being
rather old (compared to you seventeen - ancient) and
also trying to maintain various "motorcycles", my time
is limited.<br>Keep up the good work
Geoff.<br><br>Bodvar "Bo" Skutvik
Send Email
