Yeah... you caught it, oops, I could have kept on reading before I sent that last post of mine.
SA --- On Tue, 7/15/08, Ian Glendinning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Ian Glendinning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [MD] Regarding The Fundamental Nature of The Intellectual > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Tuesday, July 15, 2008, 2:49 AM > Ooops that should read Chris, not Peter. > > On 7/15/08, Ian Glendinning > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Peter you said > > "I seem to magically turn into Stalin in peoples > heads, and the > > ideological stand-off begins." > > > > My point precisely. My comments are all about changing > the rules of > > that debate - to avoid that recurring useless, > destructive, > > interminable standoff. > > > > I call this the "'somebody else's > problem' problem". You see that > > standoff as "the others" problem, not yours > / ours jointly. You are > > putting yourself in a "camp" (with DMB) and > projecting that position > > outwards. I call that "looking for a fight" > - couldn't be better > > designed to create a standoff if you tried. > > > > I'm just asking for more careful argumentation - > choice of language, > > respect etc (from all camps) - so we can make > progress. > > > > Your underlying position I haven't seen anything > to disagree with yet. > > Ian > > > > > > On 7/15/08, Christoffer Ivarsson > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > DMB - I like you! =) > > > > > > See, I'm not looking for some kind of > ideological stand-off - I'm just > > > trying to get a constructive discussion regarding > conclusions that I have > > > drawn from my way of seeing the MOQ. I mean, the > conclusions I have made is > > > quite easy - > > > > > > - First I put it to you that the nature of the > intellectual level is that of > > > the "Quest for knowledge for knowledge's > sake alone" > > > > > > - Then I say that Social Level Values should be > subordinated to Intellectual > > > ones. > > > > > > - But if Intellectual Values is the movements > towards better understanding, > > > then I have to draw the conclusion that social > structures should be modelled > > > into serving that as much as possible. > > > > > > - Looking at this I notice that > "freedom" and concepts like that more and > > > more looks like social value patterns - they seem > to be instruments which > > > the intellectual level have planted in the social > level to help itself. > > > > > > - Then It comes to me, quite naturally, that if > social structures are to be > > > remodelled to serve the intellectual level better > (and thus evolution) well > > > then the social value pattern that is the > _concept of "freedom"_ may have to > > > be looked over as well. > > > > > > The problem occurs when I propose that the > freedom that is free market > > > enterprises may have to be restricted in order to > serve the intellectual > > > level (as they are clearly social level patterns) > I seem to magically turn > > > into Stalin in peoples heads, and the ideological > stand-off begins. > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > Message: 3 > > > > Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 13:22:14 -0600 > > > > From: david buchanan > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > Ian said: > > > > Exactly Marsha, "isms" for for > people stuck in social level patterns > > > > > > > > Cause Marsha said: > > > > Marxism? Capitalism? They're both > stinky. And besides there's that old > > > saying, "garbage in, garbage out". The > Intellectual Level needs to look > > > beyond the past for something that considers the > seventh generation. > > > > > > > > dmb says: > > > > I really don't think we should pretend > to be above "isms" and I think it > > > is extremely unhelpful to pretend there is no > difference or that they all > > > belong on the social level. There are quite a few > "isms" discussed in LILA > > > and the political conflicts that make up the last > century (or so) of our > > > history is used to explain the difference between > the third and fourth > > > levels. Yes, it is true. Conversations on this > topic too often come down to > > > some kind of ideological stand-off but I really > don't think this makes both > > > sides equal. Haven't you ever noticed how > conservatives have to ignore or > > > distort what Pirsig says about politics, as in > the recent case of Ayn Rand > > > and her individualism? Take the Scopes trial of > 1925, for example, which > > > pitted evolution against religion in our public > schools. This debate > > > continues to this day and it is certainly a > conflict of "isms". Here's a key > > > section from chapter 22 of LILA... > > > > > > > > "But when that trial is seen as a > conflict of social and intellectual > > > values its meaning emerges. Scopes and Darrow > were defending academic > > > freedom but, more importantly, they were > prosecuting the old static > > > religious patterns of the past. They gave > intellectuals a warm feeling of > > > arriving somewhere they had been waiting to > arrive for a long time. Church > > > bigots, pillars of society who for centuries had > viciously attacked and > > > defamed intellectuals who disagreed with them, > were now getting some of it > > > back. > > > > The hurricane of social forces released by > the overthrow of society by > > > intellect was most strongly felt in Europe, > particularly Germany, where the > > > effects of World War 1 were the most devastating. > Communism and socialism, > > > programs for intellectual control of society, > were confronted by the > > > reactionary forces of fascism, a program for the > social control of > > > intellect. Nowhere were the intellectuals more > intense in their > > > determination to overthrow the old order. Nowhere > did the old order become > > > more intent on finding ways to destroy the > excesses of the new > > > intellectualism. > > > > Phaedrus thought that no other historical or > political analysis explains > > > the enormity of these forces as clearly as does > the MOQ. The gigantic power > > > of socialism and fascism, which have overwhelmed > this century, is explained > > > by a conflict of levels of evolution. This > conflict explains the driving > > > force behind Hitler not as an insane search for > power but as an > > > all-consuming glorification of social authority > and hatred of > > > intellectualism. His anti-Semitism was fueled by > anti-intellectualism. His > > > exaltation of the German volk was fueled by it. > His fanatic persecution of > > > any kind of intellectual freedom was driven by > it. > > > > In the United Sates the economic and social > upheaval was not so great as > > > in Europe, but Franklin Roosevelt and the New > Deal, nevertheless, become the > > > center of a lesser storm between social and > intellectual forces. The New > > > Deal was many things, but at the center of it all > was the belief that > > > intellectual planning by the government was > necessary for society to regain > > > its health." > > > > > > > > dmb continues: > > > > Pirsig makes reference to a whole lot of > other example in this chapter (as > > > well as chapter 24 and scattered throughout the > book). For Chris and our > > > other European friends, the New Deal is classic > American liberalism and the > > > conservative movement - along with the boys from > the Chicago school of > > > ecomonics - has been taking it apart bit by bit > for decades. They've been > > > propping up third-world dictators like Pinochet > and its only getting worse > > > by the day. (Again, you gotta get "Disaster > Capitalism" by Naomi Klein) The > > > YouTube video about the atheist soldier who is > suing the army for being a > > > christian organization would only be the most > recent example of how the > > > social-intellectual conflict shows up in the news > on a daily basis. I don't > > > know if the situation at the US Air Force Academy > makes national or > > > international news but around here it counts as > local news and we've been > > > hearing about it for years. (The academy is in > Colorado Springs, where many > > > leading fundamentalist leaders > > > > are headquartered.) Apparently, the > students are pressured to "get > > > saved", to convert to fundamentalism and > those who resist are made to suffer > > > for it. Add that to a thousand other assaults on > intellectual values. Oh, > > > and did you hear? They gutted the fourth > amendment the other day. Russ > > > Feingold and a few other brave souls are the > other ones who objected. I > > > mean, really, this is no time to pretend that > "isms" don't matter. Wake up > > > and smell the fascism. Please. Before its too > late. > > > > > > > > Seriously, > > > > dmb > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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/ > > > > > > 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/ 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/
