Chris, Platt --
My goodness, how Pirsig's labels have made your thinking anything but "intellectual"!
[Platt previously]:
Two problems with relying on intellectual level rationality. 1) Reason alone (SOM) doesn't provide a basis for moral judgments. 2) "So convenient it is to be a rational creature, since it enables us to find or make a reason for everything one has a mind to do." -- Benjamin Franklin. Obviously 1 and 2 are related. Example: In the current presidential contest there is no lack of reasons on either side to cast one's vote.
[Chris]:
You have a point. However, Intellectual level rationality, or, what that is aimed at - Truth - is evolutionary superior to social-level values. Rationality, as one method aiming towards truth, but not the only one, is still better to have as the guiding principle of society rather than social values like patriotism or stuff like that.
With all due respect to Mr. Prisig, rationality is neither biological nor social. It's simply what is reasonable by the principles of logic. From a moralistic and utilitarian viewpoint, reason is valuable. But so are patriotism and "stuff like that". I take it that "stuff like that" is Chris's notion of values such as Freedom, Goodness, Justice, Individual initiative, and Human compassion. If so, why should these values not be "guiding principles of society" along with Reason?
The best thing we can do then, would be to try to build a society where people can value truth. And I say "can" because people must to some degree be freed from social level dominance in order for intellectual valuing to be supreme - that's what we should build for. Just as the social level made it easier to get away from only biological values, it strengthened it's position, in the same way the intellectual level must build on and reform the social level in order to make truth more valued. Do I make sense?
The assumption here is that Truth can be valued only if society (social level) is "intellectual". But it overlooks the fact that valuing is what people do without intellect. Does the child value an ice cream cone because of his intellect? Does the moralist need intellect in order to value social justice and human compassion? Is it intellect that drives the politician toward his goal of state power?
And how, pray tell, does the social level make it "easier to get away from biological values"? As far as I can see, hunger, physical survival, procreation, and self-defense are still operative in a collective society. Do we need intellectual guidance to affirm that these are biological values?
[Platt responds]:
You make a lot of sense if one accepts the premises that 1) there is such a thing as "the truth," and 2) people must be freed from social level dominance in order to value intellectual patterns. Regarding 1) it's a dubious proposition that we can know "the truth" or that SOM intellect is the only way to find it. (See what Pirsig says about mystic understanding in Lila.) Regarding 2) many spokesmen for the value of intellect (freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom to own property, etc) suffered under the most stringent social level patterns of conformity imaginable. ... So what we should build is a society whereby there is separation of the economy and the state, just as the separation of church and state. That way, DQ will be served.
Reasonable enough. But I'd say, we don't need a State to structure society. Why not get the State out of the social value system altogether? The purpose of the State is to "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity." Unless your idea of promoting the general welfare is redistributing wealth in order to insure domestic tranquility, there is no reason for the State to manage or be involved in public charity, healthcare, education, unionization of labor, corporate welfare, scientific research, multicultural preferences, or marital obligations. By eliminating (rather than expanding) such state programs, we would allow our citizens the freedom to reasonably choose the values by which they want to live, and return to fiscal solvency as a bonus.
That way, Value and the nation's security will both be served. Essentially yours, Ham 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/
