Hi All, Bo has written a brilliant analysis. Not only have intellectuals (SOM) heaped guilt on society so " no one is personally responsible, everything is society's fault," they don't understand the battle between society from biological forces. Pirsig states the case:
"Thus, throughout this century we have seen over and over again that intellectuals weren't blaming crime on man's biological nature, but on the social patterns that had repressed this biological nature. At every opportunity, it seems, they derided, denounced, weakened and undercut these Victorian social patterns of repression in the belief that this would be the cure of man's criminal tendencies." (Lila, 22) To further clarify the issue, Pirsig wrote: "It's a war of biological blacks and biological whites against social blacks and social whites. Genetic patterns just confuse the matter. And this is a war in which intellect, to end the paralysis of society has to know whose side it is on, and support that side and never undercut it. Where biological values are undermining social values intellectuals must identify social behavior, not matter its ethnic connection, and support it all the way without restraint. Intellectuals must find biological behavior, no matter what its ethnic connection, and limit or destroy destructive biological patterns with complete moral ruthlessness., the way a doctor destroys germs, before those biological patterns destroy civilization itself." (Lila, 24) As Bo points out, it's the MOQ, not the SOM intellectual level, that recognizes what's going on. What has paralyzed the intellectuals is they place a high value on subject-object science while denying that values exist. "The paralysis of America is a paralysis of moral patterns. Morals can't function normally because morals have been declared intellectually illegal by the subject-object metaphysics that dominates present social thought." (Lila, 24) So they don't see values and morals as synonymous, and are blind to the existence of a value-driven moral universe. To today's intellectuals, morals are limited to "traditional social and religious meanings." "To answer him you have to go all the way back to fundamental meanings of what is meant by morality and in this culture there aren't any fundamental meanings of morality. There are only old traditional social and religious meanings and these don't have any real intellectual base. They're just traditions." (Lila, 7) Bo puts all this into broader perspective: > All moqists. > > I presented this LILA quote in a letter to David M. but I want > everyone's attention > > The animals Dynamically invented societies, and > societies Dynamically invented intellectual knowledge for > the same reasons. Therefore, to the question, "What is > the purpose of all this intellectual knowledge?" the > Metaphysics of Quality answers, "The fundamental > purpose of knowledge is to Dynamically improve and > preserve society." > > OK here we have the static hierarchy in a compressed form: > Social value started in biology's service but took off on a purpose > of its own. Intellectual value likewise, but here it is called > "intellectual knowledge" and this isn't about how to make a fire > and/or how to skin an animal. It is a more advanced knowledge. > > Knowledge has grown away from this historic purpose and > become an end in itself just as society has grown away > from its original purpose of preserving physical human > beings and become an end in itself, and this growing > away from original purposes toward greater Quality is a > moral growth. > > "Knowledge" has taken off on a purpose of its own and formed a > new value level - the intellectual - and note, here is nothing about > a pre-existing intellect that "knowledge" invaded KNOWLEDGE > IS THE INTELLECTUAL LEVEL. And as said in isn't about being > a good hunter or knowing the tribe's lore, it's knowledge in the > objective sense, TRUTH which was presented as SOM in ZAMM. > > But those original purposes are still there. And when > things get lost and go adrift it is useful to remember that > point of departure. The Metaphysics of Quality suggests > that the social chaos of the twentieth century can be > relieved by going back to this point of departure and re- > evaluating the path taken from it. > > For some inscrutable reason Pirsig didn't pin-point intellect's > taking leave of its social roots to become "an end in itself" but it's > clearly SOM as told in ZAMM. All the more so because the social chaos is > caused by "intellectual knowledge" looking down on social value as > despicable bigotry. Something that only can be repaired by the MOQ which > allocates SOM a place within its own framework, which it does in the SOL > interpretation. > > It says it is immoral for intellect to be dominated by > society for the same reasons it is immoral for children to > be dominated by their parents. But that doesn't mean > that children should assassinate their parents, and it > doesn't mean intellectuals should assassinate society. > > Here finally "knowledge" has become the intellectual level, and > the immorality of it being being dominated by society is plain > sailing. The point of intellect "assassinating" society is what > happenes in the intellect-steeped Western culture where guilt is > heaped on "society". No one is personally responsible, everything > is society's fault. > > Intellect can support static patterns of society without > fear of domination by carefully distinguishing those moral > issues that are social-biological from those that are > intellectual-social and making sure there is no > encroachment either way. > > Here Pirsig foresees how a MOQ-steeped future may sort out > these things better, but THAT presupposes a 4th. level=SOM that > of knowledge in the objective, truth, sense, just what he speaks of > in this passage. Not the mysterious mental faculty that has been > hijacked by SOM. > > See the SOL interpretation is underpinned and proved gain and > again but these things does not make the slightest dent in your > SOM-based understanding of the MOQ, and I am regarded as an > oddball that flaunts a strange homespun interpretation of the > MOQ. > > > Bo 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/
