Robert Pirsig divides human understanding into the two categories of romantic and classical. A romantic looks at the surface of things. They are concerned only with the outward appearance. A classic person looks beyond the outward appearance. They go beyond the surface and look at the underlying form.
I personally can relate to both the romantic and classical understanding. A prefect example of this is how I look at cars. I really like a good looking car. A car that is polished and glimmers in the sun looks better than an old, rusty car. This attraction to the outward appearance shows a romantic understanding, as I am only looking at and am concerned only with how the car looks on the surface. But, in addition to the look of the car, I am also conerned with other factors such as the durability, handling, and speed. If I use my classical side, the polished, attractive car is not necessarily better than the old, rusty car. Through my classical understanding, I look beyond what is on the outside of the cars. I look deeper and analyze all the parts and components of the cars. If the old car has a kept up engine while the polished car has a bad engine, this would make the old car better since a good engine represents good handling and speed. By not minding the outward appearance and looking only at the inner parts of the car, I display the classical understanding.
Pirsig states that both the classical and romantic understandings of the world are both"valid ways of looking at the world although irreconcilable with each other." I disagree with this statement. While I do agree that romantic and classical understandings are valid ways to view the world, I don't agree that they are irreconcilable. In fact, I think the two work well together and that most people display some of both. Just like in the above example of me with cars, I display both classical and romantic understandings. Besides just being romantic by looking the the appearance of the car on the outside, I also am classical when I look further into the car and at parts and components that make it up. I think that there are some cases where people are only romantic or only classical, but it is not impossible for someone to display some of both.
I think the example you use to show how you display both classical and romantic understanding is great. Its a personal example for you in your every day life while at the same time it helps explain what their difference is using a common everyday object. Also I agree with your opinion that "...romantic and classical understandings are valid ways to view the world, I don't agree that they are irreconcilable. " Though some people think you are one or the other I agree that many people display both, and it is great to be able to have both classical and romantic understandings.
ReplyDeleteFirst off I think your personal example of how you display both romantic and classical understanding is very good. You're connecting these ideas to your every day life/an object you see every day and something that is just overall a very common thing in peoples lives today. I think this is good because its really helpful in understanding the difference between the two and also how the fact that you display both understandings affects you personally. Second, I completely agree with your statement that romantic and classical understandings are valid ways to view the world but that you don't agree that they are irreconcilable. With your example you show how having both understandings just heightens how you view the world and though they are separate, having both is I think very common and useful in many ways.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that it is not only possible, but actually helpful to be able to evaluate experiences from both a classical and a romantic point of view. To deny yourself the benefit of both ways of thinking is to deny a part of yourself. Here's what I mean: I think we automatically view our experiences romantically (by appearance). Then our intellectual capacity kicks in, if it's something that sparks our curiousity. When that happens, we find ourselves digging deeper to understand the mechanics of what we just experienced.
ReplyDelete