Quality Depends on the Person

                The more I read this book, the more I seem to lose interest in what I am reading. In the beginning, it was fascinating. I was never really forced to think about the topics discussed so it was entertaining, it was new. However, the book started to feel redundant and repetitive. It all deals with Phaedrus, his ability to think of every possible idea in the world, but never decide on which one is right. I think this relates to our class discussions because Phaedrus is so smart, he sees every side to each situation. His consciousness is high and therefore has equal thoughts on opposing arguments. Which brings me to my next point on scientific materialism, in which I tend to disagree with. If the only things that are real are things composed of matter or energy, measureable by an instrument, then is consciousness real, are dreams real? There is no way to determine that both these things exist, but they do.  Classic formalism states that quality is unimportant because it deals with the emotions and not intelligence. When I first read this, I disagreed because I jumped to conclusions; one must obviously have intelligence to determine the quality in something. Quality is dependent on tastes and emotional attachments, but that has nothing to do with IQ, it is pure instinct. For example, when deciding between two great shirts, you do not really know why you pick one over the other; it’s just a feeling you have. This now leads me to my own personal opinion on quality. Although I do believe that quality cannot be defined, I do not think it has anything to do with what it is, rather than on the person who is deciding what it is. In other words, I think that quality itself and what determines quality lies on the eyes of the beholder.  The one example that was stuck in my head throughout the entire reading was soccer cleats. Everyone soccer player has a different pair of cleats and each player can tell you the specific reasons as to why they bought their cleats, whether it be comfort, durability, color, brand name, superstition, tradition, anything. To one player this pair is the best one ever made, to another it is atrocious. They disagree, but the cleat itself still has quality, depending on who’s looking and what they think quality is. One might think that quality is durability and comfort while another thinks it is style and price; it depends on who’s judging. 

Peace of Mind

As the narrator talks about peace of mind, I was able to relate tremendously to his opinions. As a child, I remember that peace of mind was a challenge for me. Playing my childhood video games and not being able to get past a level drove me insane, I would get extremely mad and my life felt it was ruined every time. The narrator says that peace of mind is required for life, whether it be to build a machine or to just find your own way to deal with a problem. As a matter of act, he is right. Sure enough, I would never be able to get past a a level with fury in my ind as a child, however, the next day, when I was no longer mad, I would pass the level in a heart beat. This shows how peace of mind is required to act and to think at one's maximum capacity, a level of upmost importance especially in todays world.

As the narrator suggests, sometime people take advantage of the users of their goods, such as the factory that gives instructions for "their way" of how to put the machine together. As the narrator suggests, nothing is concrete, and their are always multiple ways of putting anything together or acting on something. Instructions are meant to give you a starting point and to accomplish one end result, but that does not mean that it is the best end result. One will require peace of mind to first, be able to follow the instructions that may be confusing or annoyingly long, and second, to figure out and find the best solution and best application of the machine for yourself. Peace of mind will allow you the time to study and figure our the best outcome for the machine, which turn will reward you with more peace of mind as it works toward your intentions.

What is Quality?

The part of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance  that I read this week presented a question that I am not all that sure I know how to answer my self: What is quality? The main character goes on about Phaedrus' troubles answering the question himself after being asked if he was teaching quality to his own students. He went on to ask his kids for a 350 word essay on what it was (which seemed like a cop out to not having finished his lecture) and when I tried to answer it i could only come up with a meekly ninety eight words. I think that quality is a made up standard. Its sole purpose is to distinguish the "good" from the "bad". I think that it is brought out by man's innate need for competition. We literally cannot survive without some sort of competition and this idea of "quality" is a "civilized" man's attempt to bring competition into civilization. Essentially, quality is a game where the rules are being made up as the game i being played for the first time/ However, these rules do not favor the general public or any other individual they favor one person, the winner.
I have begun to see a distinct comparison with Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, The Stranger, Notes from the Underground, and Atlas Shrugged. The basic similarity that I find within these four novels is the concept of society's best (and by best I do not mean the wealthiest doctors, lawyers, business men I mean society's smartest people, those with the highest IQs) not being able to be active in the game that society plays. In Atlas we see all of the people that live in Galt's Gulch completely separated from society because the standard of living, the basic principles which society founds itself off of are completely unethical for them. In The Stranger, you have the main character being executed because of his Jesus like character that they are too blind and unaccepting to recognize (which is talked about in Zen when Pirsig discusses the idea of today's people not accepting Jesus if he were to appear before us).  In Notes, we see it in the main character who lives underground everyone listening to their thoughts and how petty and ridiculous they all are. The main character has distanced himself and has made himself live beneath them because he himself cannot function with them.
Talia Akerman

Quality and Intelligence

This week’s reading somehow connected with the discussion we were having in class. I never noticed it before, but now I realize that both Pirsig and Phaedrus are intelligent man who can see both sides to everything. Phaedrus sees both sides to everything such as square and quality or romantic and classical and Pirsig understands what Phaedrus sees. He also knows the in and outs of both sides. However, the fact that Pirsig has a family and friends signifies that he does not see both sides equally and is inclined to one side more than the other.

I am enjoying reading this book because as I read, it makes me stop and think about what Pirsig is saying. The interesting part is that I do not always agree; there are instances where I completely disagree with him. For example, when he states that any effort aiming at self-glorification is destructive, I think he is dead wrong. There is nothing wrong about being motivated to obtain something you want. How is it that the best athletes or business owners or doctors or lawyers became the best? Because they wanted they wanted to, they worked to be the best, they wanted that praise. Although I agree with him that motivation is greater when something other than yourself, the ultimate motivation will always be for oneself. We are innately selfish people and no matter the outcome, we always look to benefit ourselves.  

Another point I found interesting was if quality existed. It is a complicated subject to think about because, at least in my opinion, if you cannot define it, there is nothing you can say about quality because you do not know what it is. Therefore, if you do not know what it is, does it exist? Before I read ahead, I actually stopped and tried to find a way to prove that quality did exist. I mean it is obvious that something’s are better than others, but how or why? It depends on what you use them for and their purpose. So my conclusion was that quality can be anything depending on personal opinion. I would have never thought that the absence of quality on the world would as a result destroy life as we know it. The last sentence seems insane, but it makes sense. Quality causes competition which is basically what our world revolves around. 

The Machine and the Mind

            As the narrator arrives at the DeWeese house, I found myself intrigued by all the wonderful and detailed scenarios and scenery Pirsig provides. There was no doubt in y mind that the house was beautiful and the nature surrounding it was outstanding. It is at time like these where the imagery of the story is excellent that I can best picture the scene in my mind and want to be part of it to see it in real life. The way he described the exuberant dirt roads with alfalfa fields on the side, and the V shaped canyon with horses grazing under the trees seemed like paradise.

            It is fairly clear that when the narrator arrives and talks to DeWeese that their connection isn’t as strong as it was described when the narrator was there before. I knew explanations would come with it, and was extremely excited when it seemed that the narrator was finally going to reveal the real purpose for his travels, but unfortunately the conversation go interrupted. I am eager to discover it.

            The main point of the reading section was the narrators explanation of the machine and the mind, and that the machine is used to test the mind. I agree with him that the machine is not right or wrong; it is how the mind works with the machine that may be right or wrong. The machine is a test for the mind.  How one constructs one, or sues one relates perfectly with how one’s mind expects from the machine. When constructing one, or taking part in any action requiring constant input from the mind either solutions or conflicts can arise depending on how the interaction between machine and mind develops. One must began any input of effort with a clear and relaxed mind, determined to accomplish a goal and to accept mistakes to learn from them.  By doing so, the machine will work as intended, the right way for ONE individual mind. On the other hand, when one engages in effort with an agitated mind, he cannot expect the machine to help him, but the contrary it will create more problems and leave him with an even more agitated mind and with no machine suitable to help his needs.

            A machine should work in par with the necessities and adaptations for one’s mind in order to be successful for each individual and unique person.

Quality and the School System

                As Talia said, it has become more evident that Phaedrus is not a ghost, but a character from Plato’s work. However, my theory that Phaedrus is the narrator himself does not seem to leave my mind. For some reason, when Pirsig speaks of and about Phaedrus, it seems as if he is talking about himself. This is probably of the obsession he has with Phaedrus, also as Talia mentioned, but it is just a feeling I have.

                Nevertheless, my mind was pretty much blown when Pirsig began to discuss what quality was. At first I did not understand the question that was being asked or why, I mean it seemed simple enough. Yet, when he pointed out that the term quality, in itself is contradictory, I was amazed. Materialistic things are in fact some better than others, and sometimes you can say what it is that makes them better, but where the actual quality comes from is unexplainable. You cannot discuss the quality of an object if you have no idea what it is. The question that bothered me the most though, was does quality exist. If you cannot determine what it is or completely define it, then what is it? For me, this question is parallel to “of a tree falls when no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?”. There is an answer, but what is it?

                When Pirsig began to speak about school and how Phaedrus looked at the grading system, I found it weird. Most of the things that he spoke about, came to my mind right before I read them. For example, all the consequences that would come from eliminating grades and how students would react were ideas in my head before I even read. After I read, the ideas or thoughts just became larger and more vivid. I have agreed that students nowadays are more focused on the grade they receive in their report card, rather than what they actually learn and that is what Phaedrus was trying to change. Chase the knowledge behind the grade instead of the grade itself. Even though I acknowledge this truth and admit that the best type of motivation is one that comes from within, as an effort to really learn, and no matter how much I want to have this sort of motivation, I do not. Most of the work I do for school, I do not mind doing because it is interesting, although I probably would not do it if I did not have to. I guarantee you that most students think this, and would change their ways if they could, it just seems very difficult to do so. 

How we View the Past

I am starting to like this book a lot now since much of what seemed to be unexplained in the beginning is being explained now. There is finally concrete information letting us know that Phaedrus is not a ghost, and as I had thought, Phaedrus is a character out of Plato's works. While at first I had found it extremely creepy that the main character was so obsessed with Phaedrus and spoke of Phaedrus as this thing that possessed him, I now find it interesting since Phaedrus, as the main character explains hi, is one of the inventors of reason.
I really like the point the main character had about the way we view the past, present, and future. He said that "you look at where you're going and where you are and it never makes sense, but then you look back where you've been and a pattern starts to emerge." I found this to be so compelling because of how relevant and accurate it was with everyday life. I think I speak for most people when I say that the past always seems like a better, more exciting and peaceful time (not during all experiences though). In the moment, most things or situations hardly ever make sense to us. They frustrate us so much that we even begin to hate the present. Then, as we look back retrospectively into the past we see something that makes sense when the present and the future is so foggy. I think this clarity that we can see in what we have already experienced is what makes people long for the past so deeply.
The main character finally explains what his problem with technology is and this explanation made me have a much deeper appreciation, better said an appreciation since I hated him before this, for his way of thinking. I know understand why he judges John and Sylvia so much because he has explained his dislike of technology. Though many do not think about it, technology is, as the main character states, disconnected from matters of the spirit and the heart. Technology is just this thing we use to facilitate our lives and no one thinks about how plain it is because of what it gives us. If it weren't as useful as it is, people would probably criticize technology's disconnected ways constantly. I like that the main character has such a deep appreciation for the arts and for things that really awaken and connect us to our souls (and I say this without trying to sound really mystical and cheesy).

-Talia Akerman