Hi Bo, I agree with all you have written here. Thanks.
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/
