Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

[UnatcoAgent]

For anyone who's read this, I'm curious as to what you thought about it.

I have to admit that it took me quite a while to get into the book, it was almost frustrating to read at first. It didn't really change my perspective on anything, but I can see how some people might find themselves looking at life a bit differently after finishing it.

Great ending though.

 

[Armitage]

Great book. I wouldn't say it changed my perspective on things as much as maybe clarified it a bit and made me think about things more abstractly.

 

[Ogg]

Havent thought about that book in forever
now read some Kerouac....

 

[bmacd]

never heard of it.

-=bmacd=-

 

[UnatcoAgent]

Originally posted by: Armitage
Great book. I wouldn't say it changed my perspective on things as much as maybe clarified it a bit and made me think about things more abstractly.

Care to elaborate a bit Armitage?

I'm still trying to work out a few things that confused me a bit

 

[Armitage]

Originally posted by: Sabot

Originally posted by: Armitage
Great book. I wouldn't say it changed my perspective on things as much as maybe clarified it a bit and made me think about things more abstractly.

Care to elaborate a bit Armitage?

I'm still trying to work out a few things that confused me a bit

Wow, it's been years since I've read it, so I'll probably embarras myself here!

The whole issue of how to define quality in a general, abstract sense. I don't think he came up with a solution, but the discussion was interesting. Understand that at the time I first read this, I was immersed in an Air Force management initiative called TQM: Total Quality Management, which I found to be very shallow and useless. So it was an interesting contrast.

This ties into the discussions of the scientific method. That there are potentially infinate hypothesis to explain a given phenomena ... that it is the function of an undefinable "quality" that allows you to seperate the wheat from the chaff. Again, not groundbreaking stuff, but presented from a thought-provoking perspective.

Some of the social commentary on people vs. technology ... or perhaps technology people vs. non-tech people was interesting and has proven itself out for me several times.

It's perhaps the most dog-eared book I own. Lots of pages folded over where I thought there were interesting points.

 

[UnatcoAgent]

Originally posted by: Armitage

Originally posted by: Sabot

Originally posted by: Armitage
Great book. I wouldn't say it changed my perspective on things as much as maybe clarified it a bit and made me think about things more abstractly.

Care to elaborate a bit Armitage?

I'm still trying to work out a few things that confused me a bit

Wow, it's been years since I've read it, so I'll probably embarras myself here!

The whole issue of how to define quality in a general, abstract sense. I don't think he came up with a solution, but the discussion was interesting. Understand that at the time I first read this, I was immersed in an Air Force management initiative called TQM: Total Quality Management, which I found to be very shallow and useless. So it was an interesting contrast.

This ties into the discussions of the scientific method. That there are potentially infinate hypothesis to explain a given phenomena ... that it is the function of an undefinable "quality" that allows you to seperate the wheat from the chaff. Again, not groundbreaking stuff, but presented from a thought-provoking perspective.

Some of the social commentary on people vs. technology ... or perhaps technology people vs. non-tech people was interesting and has proven itself out for me several times.

It's perhaps the most dog-eared book I own. Lots of pages folded over where I thought there were interesting points.

After reading it, I have been trying to reflect how the book can be seen in daily life, and it is really quite apparent especially when considering the technical vs non-technical perspectives in different people.

The most prominent point I have been witness too is the differences between those who would be the romantics and those who would be the classic mind sets.

I have yet to approach a given problem the same way as Phaedrus did, with limitless hypothesis, I feel it's a bit beyond me at this point :S

 

[Armitage]

Originally posted by: Sabot

Originally posted by: Armitage

Originally posted by: Sabot

Originally posted by: Armitage
Great book. I wouldn't say it changed my perspective on things as much as maybe clarified it a bit and made me think about things more abstractly.

Care to elaborate a bit Armitage?

I'm still trying to work out a few things that confused me a bit

Wow, it's been years since I've read it, so I'll probably embarras myself here!

The whole issue of how to define quality in a general, abstract sense. I don't think he came up with a solution, but the discussion was interesting. Understand that at the time I first read this, I was immersed in an Air Force management initiative called TQM: Total Quality Management, which I found to be very shallow and useless. So it was an interesting contrast.

This ties into the discussions of the scientific method. That there are potentially infinate hypothesis to explain a given phenomena ... that it is the function of an undefinable "quality" that allows you to seperate the wheat from the chaff. Again, not groundbreaking stuff, but presented from a thought-provoking perspective.

Some of the social commentary on people vs. technology ... or perhaps technology people vs. non-tech people was interesting and has proven itself out for me several times.

It's perhaps the most dog-eared book I own. Lots of pages folded over where I thought there were interesting points.

After reading it, I have been trying to reflect how the book can be seen in daily life, and it is really quite apparent especially when considering the technical vs non-technical perspectives in different people.

The most prominent point I have been witness too is the differences between those who would be the romantics and those who would be the classic mind sets.

I have yet to approach a given problem the same way as Phaedrus did, with limitless hypothesis, I feel it's a bit beyond me at this point :S

Well, available hypothesis may be technically limitless, but are practically limited by the concept of "quality", which is undeniably real, even if undefinable in an abstract sense. The issue Phaedrus was facing was that, he couldn't consider quality to be real if he couldn't come up with an abstract definition of it. But if quality didn't exist, then the scientific method broke down because of the limitless hypothesis problem. ie., you can't possibly test limitless hypothesis, but if you can't put a formal definition to quality then you have to evaluate all of them. That's kind of how I remember it at least.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: Armitage

Originally posted by: Sabot

Originally posted by: Armitage
Great book. I wouldn't say it changed my perspective on things as much as maybe clarified it a bit and made me think about things more abstractly.

Care to elaborate a bit Armitage?

I'm still trying to work out a few things that confused me a bit

Wow, it's been years since I've read it, so I'll probably embarras myself here!

The whole issue of how to define quality in a general, abstract sense. I don't think he came up with a solution, but the discussion was interesting. Understand that at the time I first read this, I was immersed in an Air Force management initiative called TQM: Total Quality Management, which I found to be very shallow and useless. So it was an interesting contrast.

This ties into the discussions of the scientific method. That there are potentially infinate hypothesis to explain a given phenomena ... that it is the function of an undefinable "quality" that allows you to seperate the wheat from the chaff. Again, not groundbreaking stuff, but presented from a thought-provoking perspective.

Some of the social commentary on people vs. technology ... or perhaps technology people vs. non-tech people was interesting and has proven itself out for me several times.

It's perhaps the most dog-eared book I own. Lots of pages folded over where I thought there were interesting points.

LOL TQM must have been an agency wide program.

IMHO, TQM shouldn't have to exist if there is appropriate management & employee relations, same for unions.

 

[Gravity]

Try some Kafka now.

 

[Armitage]

Originally posted by: Sabot
After reading it, I have been trying to reflect how the book can be seen in daily life, and it is really quite apparent especially when considering the technical vs non-technical perspectives in different people.

The most prominent point I have been witness too is the differences between those who would be the romantics and those who would be the classic mind sets.

Yea, he did nail this one. There is an amazing gulf between people considered "educated", but those having a technological bent, and those without. The two sides tend to disparage each other unnecesarily, and it's rare to find somebody that truly bridges that gulf.

 

[HomeBrewerDude]

i admit i never got past page 50 or so.

I enjoyed the bits in the beginning about how the character thinks about riding (as it should be) and maintenance, but the all the psycho drama between the father and son, and the father and friend was just too damn contrived for me to want to keep reading the story line.

cheers tho, its definitely part of our pop culture.

 

[Armitage]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose

Originally posted by: Armitage

Originally posted by: Sabot

Originally posted by: Armitage
Great book. I wouldn't say it changed my perspective on things as much as maybe clarified it a bit and made me think about things more abstractly.

Care to elaborate a bit Armitage?

I'm still trying to work out a few things that confused me a bit

Wow, it's been years since I've read it, so I'll probably embarras myself here!

The whole issue of how to define quality in a general, abstract sense. I don't think he came up with a solution, but the discussion was interesting. Understand that at the time I first read this, I was immersed in an Air Force management initiative called TQM: Total Quality Management, which I found to be very shallow and useless. So it was an interesting contrast.

This ties into the discussions of the scientific method. That there are potentially infinate hypothesis to explain a given phenomena ... that it is the function of an undefinable "quality" that allows you to seperate the wheat from the chaff. Again, not groundbreaking stuff, but presented from a thought-provoking perspective.

Some of the social commentary on people vs. technology ... or perhaps technology people vs. non-tech people was interesting and has proven itself out for me several times.

It's perhaps the most dog-eared book I own. Lots of pages folded over where I thought there were interesting points.

LOL TQM must have been an agency wide program.

IMHO, TQM shouldn't have to exist if there is appropriate management & employee relations, same for unions.

TQM was a broad management fad which was bought, hook, line & sinker by the Air Force Chief of Staff at the time (can't remember his name???). The whole AF Acquisition corp. spent countless hours on this crap.

 

[UnatcoAgent]

Originally posted by: Armitage

Originally posted by: Sabot
After reading it, I have been trying to reflect how the book can be seen in daily life, and it is really quite apparent especially when considering the technical vs non-technical perspectives in different people.

The most prominent point I have been witness too is the differences between those who would be the romantics and those who would be the classic mind sets.

Yea, he did nail this one. There is an amazing gulf between people considered "educated", but those having a technological bent, and those without. The two sides tend to disparage each other unnecesarily, and it's rare to find somebody that truly bridges that gulf.

How true, Phaedrus was supposed to be one of these people who were in the 'gray' area between the two perspectives I do believe. I work with engineers this summer, and am doing some junior civil engineer work myself, and this world is completely engulfed in classic understanding. The engineers I work with are so practical, the superficial image of whatever they are working with is completely a non-issue, as long as it funtions and they understand how.

However, I am considered to be in a Fine Arts program in University, and living with Fine Arts students, I am always amazed at how many romantics there are in the world. It completely contrasts my working environment.

The best example would be in my dorm with computers. Since I was in a fine arts college, I think that my roomate and I were the only ones who had an indepth understanding of computers and their maintenance, let alone were the only ones who seemed to care about having this understanding.

So, as you said, nothing groundbreaking here, but it is very apparent. Quite amusing, I find.

 

[UnatcoAgent]

Originally posted by: HomeBrewerDude
i admit i never got past page 50 or so.

I enjoyed the bits in the beginning about how the character thinks about riding (as it should be) and maintenance, but the all the psycho drama between the father and son, and the father and friend was just too damn contrived for me to want to keep reading the story line.

cheers tho, its definitely part of our pop culture.

I know exactly what you mean, this was by far the hardest part to get passed in the book. I almost gave up myself.

 

[thomsbrain]

i got about halfway through it about a year ago. i still need to finish it. a thick read for sure.

 

[jst0ney]

My favorite part is the part where he describes how instruction manuals are put together. Pretty funny stuff.

You should now read Lila. Its heavy but a good read.

 

[Armitage]

Yea, what was that? When the technical writer goes down to the floor to find out how the thing was put together, the foreman would send him the least competant person to talk to because that was the person he could spare? And it all went down hill from there

I started Lila at one point, but didn't manage to finish it yet.

 

[UnatcoAgent]

Originally posted by: Armitage
Yea, what was that? When the technical writer goes down to the floor to find out how the thing was put together, the foreman would send him the least competant person to talk to because that was the person he could spare? And it all went down hill from there

I started Lila at one point, but didn't manage to finish it yet.

I can't believe that Chris actually died, that was such a shock...