Hi again Platt Holden wrote: > Hi Magnus, > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> I beg to differ I have always agreed with Pirsig that individuals are >>> combinations of all four levels plus the ability to respond to DQ. I also >>> agree with Pirisg when he writes: "Second, there were moral codes that >>> established the supremacy of the social order over biological >>> life—conventional morals —proscriptions against drugs, murder, adultery, >>> theft and the like." (Lila, 13). So I fail to understand your criticism. >> But those two quotes are somewhat contradictory, don't you see that? >> Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Pirsig realize this later, and then >> excused himself (and the MoQ) by saying that the MoQ is just a superficially >> constructed system made to try to understand human interaction better. Or in >> other terms, he seems to have given up on the MoQ being a complete and sound >> metaphysics, whereas I have tried to refine it to fix contradictions like >> that. > > Sorry. I don't follow you. Can you be more specific about Pirsig giving up > on the MOQ?
I didn't say "give up on the MoQ", read again. In the Paul Turner letter (http://www.moq.org/forum/Pirsig/LetterFromRMPSept2003.html) he tries to put arbitrary limits to the levels according to their "usefulness" whatever that is. I don't consider a resulting system from such level definitions a metaphysics, it's rather a lack of definitions. This is one of the reasons I started the "What is a metaphysics to you" thread. >> So, we have: >> >> 1. Individuals are combinations of all four levels plus the ability to >> respond to DQ. (I can agree with that, but it's *not* this "ability to >> respond to DQ" that gives us our mind, sets us apart from the animals or >> whatever. Everything responds to DQ. That's implied in the Q->DQ/SQ split.) >> >> 2. Social patterns are morally obliged to rule over biological patterns. >> >> Now, this "free market" is a social pattern, regardless of whether you dare >> to agree to it or not. And when you say you want the free market to reign, >> you are degrading all participants of that free market, including yourself, >> to biological patterns. That's 2 above. > > Sorry, I don't follow you. I agree the free market is a social pattern as > are all markets. Markets are where individuals by and sell products and > services in an effort to defeat the forces of biology which include among > other things, hunger. Yes. What was it you didn't follow? >> But minutes later, when it suits you, you want to change into 1 above >> and be an intellectual, free person, who *don't* want to be governed by any >> social patterns. > > But, don't you see there's a big difference between a social pattern that > promotes freedom necessary for full functioning of intellect vs. a social > pattern like socialism that smothers freedom? Now, you're getting into politics and I try to stay away from that here as much as possible, but one could for example argue that communism promotes full functioning of intellect by removing the need to waste intellectual effort on social value like money. Then socialism would smother that freedom by forcing you to waste some of your intellectual capacity to survive. Or did you mean something else? :) Magnus 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/
