Hi Bo, Agree with all. The challenge is how to get the MOQ to control S-O intellect. I fear that will never happen until it is understood that the universe is not amoral but rather a fundamental moral order progressing inexorably towards betterness.
To your last sentence I would add Lila got some bad reviews because it ran smack up against the cultural immune system of moral relativity and multiculturalism that infects academe like a metastatic cancer. Regards, Platt On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 12:26 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Platt > > 19 July you wrote: > > > I find it puzzling that in both Arlo's and DMB's answers to Mati's > > questions that there is nary a mention of the moral codes that Pirsig > > says are the defining characteristics of the levels. It seems both > > have ignored the basic premise of the MOQ that the world -- at each and > > every level -- is a moral order, and that a significant problem with > > today's scientifically dominated S-O intellect is its complete moral > > blindness. If cognitive abstractions alone are the defining > > characteristics of the intellectual level, then we have a problem -- as > > Pirsig explained: > > I agree generally with you and have often said that the "negative" > view of the levels best shows their struggle (the moral codes). You > quoted a LILA passage that concerns the social-intellectual one. > > "Morals can't function normally because morals have been > declared intellectually illegal by the subject-object > metaphysics that dominates present social thought. These > subject-object patterns were never designed for the job of > governing society. > > I agree with this too in general but I don't understand why Pirsig > presents SOM as a villain that has invaded intellect and now > "..dominates present social thought". Again it's intellect as a whole > that dominates society and consequently INTELLECT IS SOM, every > last bit of it. > > The passage goes on: > > They're not doing it. When they're put in the position of > controlling society, of setting moral standards and declaring > values, and when they then declare that there are no values > and no morals, the result isn't progress. The result is social > catastrophe. > > Still agreement, but all levels are "on top of" the former level(s) > thus all social patterns - "police" for instance - are found in intellect- > steeped cultures too, but under intellectual control. This control may > have paralyzed law and order to some degree (what Pirsig laments) > Professors claiming that the criminals are helpless victims of genes > (intellect's "O") or of upbringing (its "S") ...you know. > > It's this intellectual pattern of amoral "objectivity" that is to > blame for the social deterioration of America, because it has > undermined the static social values necessary to prevent > deterioration. In its condemnation of social repression as the > enemy of liberty, it has never come forth with a single moral > principle that distinguishes a Galileo fitting social repression > from a common criminal fighting social repression. It has, as a > result, been the champion of both. That's the root of the > problem." (Lila, 24) > > Pirsig's hope is that the MOQ by its moral level system will bring > about a permanent "armistice" between intellect and society. But that > won't happen by intellect being revised - its a static level and can't > change its spots, only by the MOQ controlling intellect. > > > BTW > There is an almost identical passage in LILA (page from LILA > (page 312) > > Phædrus thought that a Metaphysics of Quality could be a > replacement for the paralyzing intellectual system that is > allowing all this destruction to go unchecked. 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. These subject-object patterns were > never designed for the job of governing society. > > > LILA got some bad reviews due to this because it (from intellect) > looked like it prescribed some "back to the future" remedies. > > > 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/ > 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/
