The narrator of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance divides human understanding into two categories: classical and romantic. Those who fall into the classical category look at the underlying form of things. They break things down to the components rather than just looking at the surface. The romantic model is more creative and intuitive, leaving less room for precise technological mechanisms. I would categorize myself as a romantic. At first glance, I tend to look more at the surface of things rather than picking apart the components piece by piece. I look at things as a whole rather than individual systems. If something is not immediately appealing to me often times I will not give it a second thought. Jon Dutko is the perfect illustration of this tendency. If I took the time to dissect and break him down into components, I imagine he'd be an okay guy, but since I am not a classical thinker, I see him as the attention starved individual that he presents himself as, and that does not appeal to me. I prefer to look at the simple beauty of things, rather than scrutinizing each and every aspect of life. I agree with the narrator that “both are valid ways of looking at the world although irreconcilable with each other.” Classical thinking involves a more technological way of looking at things than romantic, but i don't believe that makes romantic thinking any less valid. I agree that the two cannot be brought together because once classical thinking kicks in and one begins breaking things down and looking for the underlying form, the basis of romantic thinking, creativity and imagination, are stripped from the thinker's mind and he becomes more focused on the science of whatever it is he is looking at rather than the artistic beauty of it. Similarly, if one wishes to view things as a romantic does, there is no room for the scientific breakdown that is the process of a classical thinker.