If you're stuck in a browser frame - click here to view this same page in Quantonics!

Pirsig vis-à-vis Bergson
Monism vis-à-vis Pluralism
by Doug Renselle

A lingering classical malaise yet clouds both Pirsig's and Bergson's philosophical perspectives of reality.
Both philosophers appear to have legacy classical predilections to excluded-middle
sep-a-rate analytically, n¤nactuality from actuality, i.e., to separate analytically

  • quantum n¤nactuality (Pirsig's DQ monism; Bergson's pluralism), from
  • quantum actuality (Pirsig's SQ pluralism; Bergson's monism).

(Pirsig less so, though he appears to do so specifically regarding his monism,
DQ, and his pluralism, SQ. See our recent example below.)

With Bergson, it is a little more difficult to tell, because he talks classically when
he discusses classical issues and then switches comtexts to a more quantum perspective when
he discusses solutions to those classical issues. Oft we find it difficult to follow his comtext switches.

We think this latent classical tendency to use SOM's knife on reality's 'largest'
philosophical c¤mplements is at root of their difficulties.
Note that we too must work very hard to distinguish our comtexts.
Our n¤vel Quantonics language terms make it much easier for you, reader,
to know what our local comtext is.

Those same, unintended classical knife cuts pestered us with difficulties too,
until we commenced our studies of Bergson's works.
During our review of his Time and Free Will (TaFW), a n¤vel enlightenment manifested.
Our quantum perspectives, mainly our epiphanies of quantum both/and,
n¤n-Aristotelian, included-middle Quantonic reality,
assisted greatly Pasquali's endarkenment switch moving to its ¤ff position.

Here is some borrowed text from our review of Bergson's TaFW Topic 19:

"In a recent postcard to us (dated 21Dec2000), [Pirsig] says, 'I think the static patterns of cultures are in accord with Geertz' pluralism, but they all follow quality which in its Dynamic condition is monistic not pluralistic.'

[We see similar predilections by Bergson
in TaFW Topic 19, e.g.:]

" is enough for us to have shown that, from the moment
when you attribute the least homogeneity [SQ]
to duration [DQ], you surreptitiously introduce space [SQ]

Note Pirsig's use of a classical 'not' in our TaFW Topic 19 quote above which is plainly
classical application of SOM's knife to dichotomize his own monism (DQ) and pluralism (SQ).
Clearly, this is throbbing, persistent legacy classical predilection on Pirsig's part.

(Those students of Quantonics interested in a historical perspective of Doug's interrelationships
among other Pirsig followers may find it fascinating that this same issue forced Doug's
departure from 'The Lila Squad.' Pirsig's most ardent followers harbor this same persistent legacy
predilection with Pirsig. Bodvar Skutvik is a most idiomatic defender of this classical legacy
and promotes it as, "SOM as Quality Intellect." We flatly deny this view as classical legacy.
This is pure stuff of what Pirsig calls, "SOM's Church of Reason." It is SOM's knife!
Any student of Quantonics knows that our quantum stage is a quantum included-middle quanton
(n¤t a SOM excluded-middle classical object) of Bergson's I3. 10Apr2001 - Doug.)

Bergson's jargon is significantly different from Pirsig's,
even though it shares abundant (monism/pluralism inversion-transmogrified) semantics with Pirsig.

We were less surprised to see Bergson's classical either/or dichon (i.e., a Pirsigean platypus) here
than we were to see Pirsig's own classical objective either/or negation above. Bergson is telling us that we
may have either "...pure duration [DQ]" or if we do not, we "...surreptitiously introduce space [SQ]."

When we distill these views, rather than seeing more quantumesque:

quanton(DQ,SQ), and (Pirsig)
quanton(SQ,DQ),    (Bergson)

Instead we see more classical:

dichon(DQ, SQ), and (Pirsig)
dichon(SQ, DQ).    (Bergson)

Yet from belabored study of both philosophers' works, we are more than certain neither
intended their own unpremeditated and spontaneous classicalese intrusions.
But, as we can see, they both did! Fascinating!

Those of you who are students of Quantonics know that quantum reality permits n¤ real classical either/ors,
n¤ Aristotelian excluded-middles, n¤ Newtonian side-by-side y=f(t) perfect mathematical point objects.
If you adhere quantum real philosophy, you know how important it is to discard SOM's knife, and
to quantum leap out of SOM's box, its Church of Reason.

Of course, without our Quantonic notation and language, it is nearly impossible using classical English to
even express a quantonic included-middle and its intrinsic c¤mplementarity, subjective negation, etc.

We are preparing a superb novel graphic which integrates quantum, Quantonics', Pirsigean, and Bergsonian views. Watch for its debut here.

Thanks for reading,

Doug - 1Apr2001.


To contact Quantonics write to or call:

Doug Renselle
Quantonics, Inc.
Suite 18 #368 1950 East Greyhound Pass
Carmel, INdiana 46033-7730

©Quantonics, Inc., 2001-2027 — Rev. 29Nov2014  PDR — Created 1Apr2001  PDR
(2Apr2001 rev - Change our quantum comtextual uses of classical 'new' to more quantum 'novel.')
(10Apr2001 rev - Reformat text to clarify semantic intent.)
(23Apr2001 rev - Clarify some text. Add link to our Quantonics English Language Remediation for Millennium III page.)
(17Jul2001 rev - Correct spelling/typographical errors.)
(14Dec2001 rev - Add top of page frame-breaker.)
(17Mar2002 rev - Minor
QELR remediation.)
(2Jun2002 rev - Add link to our Pirsig recent postcard quote in topic 19 of Bergson's TaFW.)
(23Jul2002 rev - Change QELR links to A-Z pages.)
(22Jan2003 rev - Move caption text, containing a table, outside table.)
(14Oct2003 rev - Correct typo.)
(14Jan2005 rev - Reset legacy red text. Adjust colors.)
(7Mar2005 rev - Update page top GIF.)
(28Jul2007 rev - Reformat.)
(9Apr2009 rev - Make page current. Change some table parameters. Replace a wingding font with a gif.)
(29Nov2014 rev - Make page current. Reset legacy markups. Adjust colors.)