What's Best?
Now Playing: "Us" by regina Spektor
Topic: Zenacious P
In the first three chapters Pirsig subtly (and not so subtly) introduces us to his own philosophy. He discusses memory (blackbirds), perception (“frames”), quality (“what’s new” vs. “what’s best”), and technology (dripping faucets and motorcycle maintenance)—and that’s just the first chapter. He ends the first chapter with,
I disagree with them about cycle maintenance, but not because I am out of sympathy with their feelings about technology. I just think that their flight from and hatred of technology is self-defeating. The Buddha, the Godhead, resides quite as comfortably in the circuits of a digital computer or the gears of a cycle transmission as he does at the top of a mountain or in the petals of a flower. To think otherwise is to demean the Buddha...which is to demean oneself. That is what I want to talk about in this Chautauqua.
I think in a way he’s right. If we can find God (not the Buddha, but Yaweh) in nature, and we can find Him in art (e.g. a poem like Paradise Lost, a sermon like “Sinner’s in the Hands of an Angry God”, or a painting like Rembrandt’s Return of the Prodigal), then why couldn’t we find his glory reflected in a motorcycle or a faucet. By engaging in technology we can proclaim the glory of the Creator and reflect the Imago Dei through our own acts of creation.
Yet, as we discussed today (Thursday), the prerequisite for any philosophical discussion—and remember, all language partakes in some kind of philosophical discussion just through the act of speaking—is a proper, Biblical anthropology. This is what’s missing in Pirsig’s gross assumptions of chapter two which lead him to prematurely terminate a motorcycle trip with Chris. Don’t worry solely about the object (the motorcycle), remember always to consider the subject (the rider).
There’re many ways one could respond to these chapters. You may engage in his discussion about whether the laws of science really exist; or on whether education is mass hypnosis. One might attempt to define “common sense,” “science,” “truth,” or “quality.” Still another route would be to engage in a discussion of how the constant motorcycle maintenance references are part of a greater metaphor (“the real motorcycle is yourself”) which deserves a lengthy dissection. Or you could just react to my post above. Have at it.
Posted by helmstreet
at 4:24 PM PDT
quizzical
incredulous