Live data from Hacker News

Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

hn-books.com

41–50 of 80 posts

Re: Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

#41
post #33
post #3

Out of curiosity, how did people who had already studied philosophy find this book? Nothing in it struck me as particularly revelatory, and I'm wondering if maybe I just wasn't the intended audience.

There's a difference between a work being a result of philosophical genius and a work producing in the reader a philosophical experience. As someone who studied philosophy, I felt that his proof for the existence of quality lacking. He appealed to a small sample, his class, in order to ground the existence of quality which is simply a hasty generalization. However, I did feel something of a philosophical experience w…

Yes. It should be said that this is not a philosophical book. It is a book about a man struggling with his sanity and parenthood and he does that in terms of his philosophy.

Because of this struggle, and because of the personal and warm way he does it, this book has a philosophical impact: it makes you think about philosophy and understand how philosophy affects people. But it's not a philosophical text by any means.

Re: Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like that comparison, he is kind of the troll of philosophical history. The interesting thing about Nietzsche, though (esepecially in Geneaology ) is that he takes on so many different voices to address different existing philosophies such that you can't really say (although many have) that he's anti-semitic (In fact, IIRC he seemed to dig the old testament Jews' style) or anti-christianity . The difference between…

>adolescent Pointing out the hypocrisy and self-consuming nature of the greater moral system underlying western religion is scarcely adolescent and even in his day that took a good deal of courage to speak out like that. He was provocative, but not for its own sake.

I wasn't trying to reduce his criticisms to adolescent jabs - I have great respect for his analysis. But he occasionally gets a little carried away and takes an unnecessary pot shot. They're symptomatic of his sort of unique brand of narcissism and, were he any less of an intellectual force, probably would have been edited out of the final versions.

Re: Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

#43

Lila: An Inquiry into Morals is Pirsig's second book which is described as the defining work of the Metaphysics of Quality (MOQ). I loved ZAMM, but Lila is a much better book and even more though-provoking. I've read it 4 times through, and I still don't think I could write a complete review of it. So if you liked ZAMM, definitely pick up Lila.

I agree, I think I read Lila first then went back to ZAMM and was not that impressed by it. I then went and read Lila another 3 three times.

Re: Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> grandstanding for lack of a better word. This is really interesting to me. I've recently started reading more political philosophy, and a few weeks ago, dug into "On the Genealogy of Morals" by Nietzsche, and when I got to that whole anti-Judiasim bit (the one about hawks and lambs), all I could think was "this sounds like /b/" or "I bet he was just trolling for pageviews, given that he's writing this in 1887 Germa…

I like that comparison, he is kind of the troll of philosophical history. The interesting thing about Nietzsche, though (esepecially in Geneaology ) is that he takes on so many different voices to address different existing philosophies such that you can't really say (although many have) that he's anti-semitic (In fact, IIRC he seemed to dig the old testament Jews' style) or anti-christianity . The difference between…

you can't really say (although many have) that he's anti-christianity

He wrote a book called The Anti-Christian. What else can you say?

Re: Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

#45
ZAMM and the follow-on Lila are both worthwhile reads. However, I was uncomfortable with Persig's (pervasive) discussion of insanity.

He defines insanity as, roughly, holding beliefs that differ widely from those held by an overwhelming majority of society. There seems to be an explicit avoidance of physical causes for mental illness to the point of rejecting the idea that mental illness is an "illness" to be treated. His "insanity" is a natural result of pursuing complex paths of thought to their logical end (beyond where most people take them).

Can anyone shed light about the current (medical) take on mental illness and whether it jives with what Persig has to say?

Re: Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

#46
post #45

ZAMM and the follow-on Lila are both worthwhile reads. However, I was uncomfortable with Persig's (pervasive) discussion of insanity. He defines insanity as, roughly, holding beliefs that differ widely from those held by an overwhelming majority of society. There seems to be an explicit avoidance of physical causes for mental illness to the point of rejecting the idea that mental illness is an "illness" to be treated…

I don't think his account ever claimed to be a factual, science-based analysis of mental illness, but rather a subjective account from someone who is/was mentally ill.

Re: Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

#47
1.5 cents: - fine book placing some of the key ideas of greek philosophy in a context where they could resonate with baby boomers / others (now hackers). "first contact" with such ideas by most thoughtful people is exciting, hence a lot of the feedback. - those well read in philosophy tend to find it problematic, thin, etc. they also tend to dislike the practical application of the ideas suggested by RP. - lastly, Pirsig certainly did not break any new ground in philosophy but comparisons to the crazed rambling of Ayn Rand are unfair.

Re: Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

#48
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pirsig and Rand both embed their philosophy within fiction, thus leaving you befuddled and oddly unsatisfied: "Did I just read a philosophical treatise or fiction?"

Does it matter? Isn't the point to read these ideas and to as with all good ideas they get told in many forms. As with art movements, perspective shifts and whole genres of the arts move in unison, from performing arts to fine art. Unless as is the case with some ideas, the medium is the message, then the format used, be it a nice comfortable paperback or a think hardcover text is of no importance.

Does it matter? Hmm. That's a good point -- it may not.

But ZAMM and Atlas Shrugged certainly felt to me a bit dishonest in that these works are primarily delivery devices for the authors' philosophical ideas. Other authors inject philosophy and ethics into their "straight" fiction, such as the philosophical rant-free work of Tolkien (LOTR = a treatise against fascism) and Stephen King (The Stand = a treatise against organized religion), but their philosophies never smack you in the face. [edit: grammar]

Re: Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

#49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>adolescent Pointing out the hypocrisy and self-consuming nature of the greater moral system underlying western religion is scarcely adolescent and even in his day that took a good deal of courage to speak out like that. He was provocative, but not for its own sake.

I wasn't trying to reduce his criticisms to adolescent jabs - I have great respect for his analysis. But he occasionally gets a little carried away and takes an unnecessary pot shot. They're symptomatic of his sort of unique brand of narcissism and, were he any less of an intellectual force, probably would have been edited out of the final versions.

You're right, but I think he's allowed the indulgence considering the kind of "peers" he had to deal with usually.

Besides that, the man just isn't given enough credit these days.

Re: Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

#50
post #45

ZAMM and the follow-on Lila are both worthwhile reads. However, I was uncomfortable with Persig's (pervasive) discussion of insanity. He defines insanity as, roughly, holding beliefs that differ widely from those held by an overwhelming majority of society. There seems to be an explicit avoidance of physical causes for mental illness to the point of rejecting the idea that mental illness is an "illness" to be treated…

I don't think his account ever claimed to be a factual, science-based analysis of mental illness, but rather a subjective account from someone who is/was mentally ill.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. A major theme in the books is reconciling science with subjective experience, but he doesn't advocate doing so by ignoring factual things. I would have a hard time believing that he intentionally treated mental illness that way.
Post reply on HN