> [Platt] > About James' pragmatism, Pirsig wrote: "The idea that satisfaction alone is > the test of anything is very dangerous, according to the Metaphysics of > Quality. There are different kinds of satisfaction and some of them are > moral nightmares. The Holocaust produced a satisfaction among Nazis. That > was quality for them. They considered it to be practical. But it was a > quality dictated by low level static social and biological patterns whose > overall purpose was to retard the evolution of truth and. Dynamic Quality. > James would probably have been horrified to find that Nazis could use his > pragmatism just as freely as anyone else, but Phaedrus didn't see anything > that would prevent it." (Lila, 29) Do you agree? > > Ron: > Greetings Platt, > I would think Pirsig might be horrified that one could use his Moq > Just as freely as anyone else also. > > Put a tag on morals and you do just the same as the Nazis.
Greetings Ron, Sorry, I don't follow you. What "tag" are you referring to? > Morals are a function of evolution. You seem to imply the reification of > Cultural norms as being a universal truth. Whose cultural norms are you referring to? There are almost as many cultural norms as there are cultures. > The Nazi final solution was not embraced by all of the party, but, > The hierarchal structure and the consequence played a role > As well as the individuals faith in the hierarchy to determine > "what is best" If you are referring to the hierarchy of the German society under the Nazis, I agree. > Example: > You support a president that favors war > Counter to cultural morals > Because of the belief in what's best > And the faith in the hierarchy. Didn't most of those now opposed to the war support it at the beginning? Since when is war counter to cultural morals? Or the MOQ? > You favor capitalism which is > Counter to Christian ethics and morals > Of charity to the poor. Capitalism has done more to erase poverty than any other economic system in history. Doesn't the MOQ favor capitalism over socialism? Where in the MOQ do you find support for "turn the other cheek," "my brother's keeper" and other Christian ideals? > The deceit of the nationalist party > Was preparing the stage to justify > It's own brand of pragmatism. > Lets not get practical quality and justifiable > Genocide confused. Do you think Pirsig was confused in making the statement above? > Quality is not universal truth > Morality is not universal truth > Morals are a process not a truth. Since in the MOQ Quality, morality and reality are all the same, I would conclude that -- to Pirsig at least -- Quality is about as close to universal truth as you can get. > Morality is the process of preference. > What determines what one prefers is another > Thing altogether. Agree. In effect the MOQ says that "the process of preferences" created the world and maintains its structure. > Truth is a term used to define a relative level > Of certainty within a particular context as it > Applies to its use. Agree except "as it applies to its use" (pragmatism). Some things are true that have no use at all. > Quality, morals, truth, and betterness > Do not exist outside the conditions which > Define them. > Pirsig uses the term Moral as a metaphor > For an evolutionary function of preference. > Not a culturally defined ideal of good. Agree in general, but according to the MOQ hierarchy of morals, some cultures are better than others. "Cultures are not the source of all morals, only a limited set of morals. Cultures can be graded and judged morally according to their contribution to the evolution of life." (Lila, 24) Regards, Platt Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
