Jungle Boots
i think that way is a part of it...
but when i think quality, im not thinking just quality as in quality goods... im thinking the term qualitative or the qualities of an object.
Quality is how we, the subject, interpret and evaluate the object. like the way an object looks... like shyness is a quality of the boy.
i feel like suchness is like the concept of tao. and in the same respect quality is like the concept of tao... like finding suchness is like listening to a friend and saying to yourself "thats deep man". that deep thought was a quality thought.
suchness seems to me to be something you would aspire to find in things, to find in life, to find in yourself... kind of like buddha nature. and in that respect then quality, being the "quality goods" type of quality, the "a good thing" kind of quality, also becomes a good thing you want to find in all things by looking at those things for what they are... how they are.
but since quality is both the qualitative values of things how it looks what it feels like.... sensory stuff... and it is also the goodness of the things... then it is like buddha nature... it is like suchness... it is the finding of good in things by looking at what those things are, and what they are like.
like this conversation is filled with suchness...
(throughout this mindless rant... you can flip flop the term quality and suchness at any point for the same effect i think)
Nyeh I tend to disagree. The Metaphysical Quality Robert Pirsig speaks of is a scientist's attempt to actually put a ground basis into a node of intuitive thought, as many scientists have been trying to do since the advent of Quantum Physics. You have to remember, he had a vigorous scientific background. He's just more acutely observant than most are used to dealing with.
The whole conundrum that lead to the formulation of the Metaphysics of Quality was the observation that the very basis of scientific thought was intuitive rather than logical in nature and that was the formulation of hypotheses. One of course tried to cover this up by stating that such hypotheses are logically deduced from the facts presented, but such a stance completely ignores the fact that for any given set of facts, there are infinite hypotheses that can be generated to state the relationship between those facts. If hypotheses were generated by pure logical deduction, there never could be an assortment of hypotheses to choose from and no need to 'test' them either because the answer of the relationship between them is so obvious.
The conundrum caused him to branch out in philosophy. He very soon found out what any Buddhist/Hindu/Taoist could tell you about the nature of thought and that's that the more you try to chase it and pin it down, the more it eludes you. At this point he travels a similar path to Siddhartha when he lives the ascetic life before coming to the bodhi tree. And both experience much the same phenomenon, the very truth either had been seeking didn't find them until they 'gave up' the search for it. The Buddha ate a nourishing meal, Robert Pirsig taught rhetoric.
In Robert Pirsig's case though you have to look at what the Metaphysics of Quality actually
does, it's purpose. As he states that the quality event is the relationship between observer and observer, subject and object, he actually creates a system of measurement. The quality of an object reflects the nature of the relationship between subjects and objects. An observer feels more of a connection 'down to the bones' with a quality object whereas the observer will be detached from a low quality object. The Metaphysics of Quality is giving scientific thought a means to branch out from pure logical formulation into nodes of intuitive thought it does indeed use, so that science may evolve and take on a more complete view of reality. Quality is the stepping stone Robert Pirsig created for science to branch out into intuition.
That's not to say it doesn't have awesome applications in the lay life which he also laid out, but I'm pretty sure that it was originally intended for the scientific community. Much of what he says has that 'Zen' feel to it that expresses a way of living in 'mindfulness', but I wouldn't go so far as to say Quality would be an adequate way to describe 'suchness'.
The problem with suchness is that you can never analytically point out what it is and define it. Robert Pirsig did make an emphasis on Quality being indefinable at first as he delved into it, but eventually found he could make a definition that would satisfy the logical thinker. You'll have no such thing with suchness as suchness is closer to experience than an actual statement describing reality, at least as I understand it. You only discern it by experiencing it.
It's best to take the Taoist approach on this one and flat out deny that any statement pertaining to suchness actually describes suchness, thus leveling the idea that there's ground to the playing field to build upon. 'Suchness' seems the reaction to the idea of 'void' or 'emptiness' in Buddhism, making the reality we experience seem to have a bit more substance than we do in the idea of 'void' itself. Indeed, 'void' can easily lead itself to confusion about the basis of Buddhist thought as it seems that the Buddhist unravels the entire world and it falls to pieces until there's nothing left to observe and that's certainly not the case. 'Suchness' is such a seemingly esoteric term that one has no choice but to drop what one thinks one knows in order to discover it. You must not so much understand but
experience 'emptiness' and 'void' before you can discover and experience 'suchness'.
The crude definitions of each are respectively the lack of substance and form to what we believe have substance and form such as the egotistical concept of self, the illusory nature of reality versus reality just as it is, as such. Robert Pirsig's Quality falls more under the realm of concepts that 'void' and 'emptiness' destroys rather than being an expression of 'suchness', at least as I see it, although Quality does point in it's general direction depending on how one approaches the Metaphysics provided.
I'm being very gross in the direction I'm pointing here on purpose, because any attempts to describe it are inevitably going to fall short.
Reply
