Hi Platt 4 Oct.
I had written: > > According to Pirsig communism is an intellectual pattern, that much > > I remember, but where does he place capitalism (I don't have LILA > > here) I don't think at the social? Platt > The MOQ sanctions the morality of social level capitalism, as > explained by the following: > "The Metaphysics of Quality says the free market makes everybody > richer-by preventing static economic patterns from setting in and > stagnating economic growth. That is the reason the major capitalist > economies of the world have done so much better since World War II > than the major socialist economies. It is not that Victorian social > economic patterns are more moral than socialist intellectual economic > patterns. Quite the opposite. They are less moral as static patterns > go. What makes the free-enterprise system superior is that the > socialists, reasoning intelligently and objectively, have > inadvertently closed the door to Dynamic Quality in the buying and > selling of things. They closed it because the metaphysical structure > of their objectivity never told them Dynamic Quality exists." (Lila, > 17) A little late, but I have hoped for an epiphany as I feel on slippery ground regarding economics and finance (it has not emerged though) Yet I sense some error in the recent cry for state regulations, communism's regulation in the form of 5 year plans with fixed production, prices and wages prevented recessions, but it prevented progess too. Regarding the Q-levels, the discipline "economics" is a scientific study and thus intellect, and speaking of bygone times' economics is intellect looking down from its perch. The Victorian time may have been Q-social in many ways but England had introduced "economics" as a study long ago, Adam Smith wrote his "The Wealth of Nation" already in the sixteenth century. My point is that really ancient times knew no economics, it was just trade and this was a social pattern and will remain so, but along with all social patterns it has come under intellectual control in the form of "economics". Medieval times which was a rebounding of the social level had very strong regulations of trade and profession (the Guilds) this not from any idea of promoting "economics", it was the social value of keeping people in the place God had allotted them. And this tendency remained as the class system that lasted till the French Revolution. Pirsig sees both capitalism and communisms as economical systems - and thus intellectual - but the former seems more locked into its static intellectual level than the latter and I guess that's a valid assessment. Another point is that Pirsig here says that intellect's objectivity has closed the door ...etc. That is exactly it, the 4th. level is the S/O distinction , subjectivity the necessary dark contrast to the light of OBJECTIVITY. And that's my axe as you may know. 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/
