What is Quality?

Preamble: I wrote this in August 2007, probably shortly after I read Lila, Robert Pirsig’s long-winded sequel to Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. Zen etc. is a great novel with some philosophy and metaphysics interspersed that introduces his notion of Quality, and I recommend reading it, whereas Lila is a metaphysical exploration of these ideas with bits of a novel interspersed and is very boring. Both were thought-provoking enough to make me write this, though I am aware some of it only makes sense if you’ve read both, and some of it only makes sense to me. (Also, I apologize for the cheesy ending.) Anyway, without further ado, enjoy, and comment, especially if you are feeling philosophical! (If not, consider opening some wine.)

Is the lack of meaning over which I’ve been lamenting the same as lack of Quality?

Example which brought about this question: receiving scarves, gloves, and picture frames from Mom’s friend at Christmas and birthdays; a nice gesture, devoid of meaning – for me, worse than nothing?

This is to be the beginning of a discourse on Quality… or something.

Quality: the process by which the experiencer experiences the experience; the relationship between subject and object; the “pre-intellectual awareness” of object by subject; the connection between mind and matter, the perennial false dichotomy, two polar opposites residing in the same circle; an event; Reality.

Sweetly pondering chaos… “It is my path, though not my choice, and I will know the meaning.”

What is meaning?

I have and still do maintain that “the meaning of life” does not exist.  What is the meaning of a flower?  There is no purpose for which humanity exists, that guides or should guide our actions.  There is no striving from inorganic to biological to social to intellectual forms of static quality, no fight between static and Dynamic any more than there is a fight between mind and matter, subject and object, ideas and reality, or whatever terms suit you best.  Some believe ideas are the only way to truth, others experience.  Some like it hot.

I feel like I can interpret Zen etc. in such a way that it makes perfect sense to me, but that my interpretation would mis-represent what Pirsig is trying to say, as evidenced by Lila.  Why do good ideas always turn bad when they attempt to solve everything?  If Quality is composed of static and Dynamic, but static is lower-case and Dynamic always capitalized, and they are always opposed… what’s the point of introducing the static?  Indeed, it makes an easier subject for a Metaphysics, being definable and categorical; but these are the very things that Quality is not, and seemingly neither is Dynamic Quality, and so one wonders how static quality is Quality at all.

If one is better able to repair a motorcycle when they are open to Quality, does it mean one’s actions have intellectual quality?  Does a bolt have more inorganic quality when it is placed in the correct position on the bike, so as to hold it together?  Does the bolt care where it is placed; does it strive toward being assembled, being a part of a larger machine; does this give the bolt meaning?

What is the meaning of a bolt?

Humans are a process that has become aware of itself.  (Switching philosophical novels for a moment…)  But are we really more aware than, say, a squirrel?  It may not be able to tell that a car is coming, but it’s driven by hunger and the need for nuts.  It wants to survive, but sometimes its desire for better nuts somewhere else leads it to ruin.  We may not be able to tell that our foreign policy moves will lead to war, but we are driven by our own need to survive, and historically this has been at the expense of other tribes/nations/belief systems.

Are Meaning and Quality the same thing?

There’s something in me that loves certain objects, like my dragon candle for example, because of their meaning.  Obviously this is a meaning with which I imbue them, and exists for me and me alone.  It is a state of connection between myself and the thing.  In this way it is indeed very similar to Pirsig’s Quality.

However, I can’t believe that it has existence of its own, as a primary “pre-intellectual” reality, on par with the Tao.  Quality, an event, the phenomenon of awareness perhaps – awareness without thought – can be seen as the primary reality, out of which subject and object spring.  Does anything exist which cannot be perceived?  Common sense says of course, but philosophy says we can never know.  So maybe my aversion to giving Meaning this same status is the result of a lingering intuition that primary reality must be unchanging, constant, eternal, universal.  Okay, by “unchanging” I don’t mean it doesn’t change over time, but that in each instant of time it is the same everywhere…. But what is “everywhere”?

Anyway, perhaps I resist saying that meaning is the same as Quality because this raises meaning from a personal phenomenon to a universal primal Meaning of Life; it becomes Capitalized, a caricature of the thing itself, at once everyone’s contradictory ideas of it.  All of a sudden it has some Special Significance.  It is the Answer.

What was the question?

If I stick with my explanations (not definitions) that Quality is an event or process which connects subject to object, then the problem is solved.  Instead of elevating meaning (whose lack I lament) to the status of some Reality un-defined as Quality, I can instead realize that this mysterious quality can be understood to be the same as the meaning which gives objects, events, actions, etc. a fullness and wonder the absence of which is characterized by meaninglessness.

So when I receive a gift of another cheap scarf, it is not the item I miss, but the meaning behind it.  That is to say, I would rather receive something which connects me to this un-defined Quality, where I could say that this item has meaning and this meaning brings me outside of myself.  I would desire a gift that brings to me a feeling that someone cares.

Ah, good, I wanted to talk next about Pirsig’s notion that the inverse of Quality is caring.  It is hard to imagine an inverse of an un-definable pre-intellectual awareness event which creates subjects and objects, but such is the failing of words made plain.  You have to care to realize Quality, and opening to Quality entails caring.  “Caring about what?” is perhaps the wrong question that we are inclined to ask.  Caring is an investing of energy to the task of understanding; it is the desire to understand.  To understand is to achieve Quality, to have your perceptions of reality come from reality itself instead of preconceived notions, emotions, or drama.  To say that a thing lacks Quality is thus to say that it is meaningless, which is to say that understanding is not possible; but if one could understand the thing, Quality would be found.  It is as misguided to think that some things have Quality while others don’t as it is to think that some things are more real than others.  Thus the answer to the question which has been bugging me in some form ever since reading Zen etc. and Lila, that is, “How does one thing have quality while another doesn’t?”, which can be rephrased as “Does x have quality?”, can be answered: “Do you care?”

If you are open to understanding (that is, you care… see previous musings for more), then Quality shines forth.  That is to say, “A sacred place is a place where Eternity shines through Time.” (Joseph Campbell)

In my head, all of these ideas are really describing the same thing; all these words are explicating the same wordless reality, the indefinable, unfathomable, etc. etc.

“Eternity is Now” – Frank Herbert, Dune

“Follow Your Bliss” etc. – Joseph Campbell

“Quality blah Victorians blah blah” – Robert Pirsig

“The Tao that can be Named is not the Eternal Tao” – Lao Tzu

“A deep, abiding, living change” – Krishnamurti

“Bother” – Winnie-the-Pooh

I’m still left with the feeling that this is simply not enough.  It may be true, beautiful, and simple, but is that enough?  What would someone reading these ramblings think?  Obviously, it would depend on their past thoughts and experiences, but what can possibly be communicated here?  I see all these things as coming from a common thread which humanity shares, which human myths express; it resounds in me and fills me to overflowing, like a good piece of music.  But that’s just me.  I’ve had certain thoughts, reflected on certain other people’s thoughts, had certain experiences, possess certain personality traits and proclivities, which combine to form these lofty ideas.  I enjoy thinking in this way and attempting to open myself to wondrous new ideas, and finding their place in a coherent whole.  These things connect with me in a powerful way; but how can such a connection be communicated?  It is exactly the problem of “defining Quality,” of “Naming the Tao,” which Pirsig was drawn to do in Lila while at the same time acknowledging its impossibility.

Of course it’s impossible.  Wholly and completely impossible, but utterly necessary.  Humanity has some choices to make in the near future, and it is no longer a question of isolated groups surviving or not.  We are a global system, and forgetting to care about this amazing truth could spell disaster.  Then again, disaster is a part of life.

And we are life.  All of us.  Every one.  We are nature, and we are civilization.  We have become aware of ourselves, but we do not yet understand ourselves.

In the end, to care is a choice that all of us must make on our own.