Hey Andre, You do a fine job of criticizing me. So I ask, "What social/political/economic system do you support?" I hope your answer won't be based on an SOM ideology like Marxism, or a mix of SOM ideologies.
Thanks, Platt On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 5:41 AM, Andre Broersen <[email protected]>wrote: > Platt to Andre: > Do you comprehend the history of the MOQ and why Pirsig favors free markets > over SOM socialism? > > Andre: > I wil not pretend I do comprehend the total history of the MoQ, that is why > I continue to read relevant materials and joined this Discuss in order to > deepen my understanding. Pirsig admitted himself that Lila is, at times > vague and seemingly contradictory, reasoning that the MoQ is too big to be > 'contained' within a few hundred pages of a book. > > You seem to be reducing the MoQ to be an argument in favour of 'free' > markets as against socialism. Where on earth you get that from I do not > know. I thought that Pirsig was arguing against SOM and its ideologically > conceived concept of the good (both capitalist and socialist...plus all the > variations in between). > > You continue to ignore my questions or adquately address them by > selectively > (ab)using quotes from Lila to reinforce your own ideological base...a base > which Pirsig has exposed to being flawed, misconceived and wrong on some > very fundamental accounts. > > Your question juxtaposing 'free markets' and 'SOM socialism' is > therefore silly. > > Andre: > Those doctrines are what set Pirsig on the road to writing ZMM and Lila. He > recognised the defect in them. > > Platt: > Right. In the MOQ he overcomes the defect in SOM. > > Andre: > The MoQ exposes the defect and suggests ways of overcoming them. Problem is > that you are putting them right back again with your ideological propaganda > which hovers between an adherence to and reinforcement of > existing biological and social patterns of value. > You are usurping the MoQ to justify these levels. > > In the MoQ freedom means a moving away from static patterns. > > You want to reinforce these static patterns. This has the effect of binding > people and keeping them un-free. And look at what a disastrous effect this > neo-conservative political/economic ideological policy has had on the US > and > the rest of the world. What you are proselytising is immoral. > > Platt: > Right, and you don't need to read Northrop to know that after reading Lila. > > Andre: > You sound like a religious fundamentalist...don't question the Bible! > > Platt: > And if you are a SOM leftist you pretend to care about all the "victims" of > the mean, selfish capitalists so you can pose as their savior and vote for > laws that make them dependent on government in order to gain power for > yourself. > > Andre: > This reminds me of Paul's (the apostle I mean) bullshit by suggesting that, > if you are not for us you must be against us. What a narrow-minded > pretentious load of crap. > > Platt: > Do you ever question the morality of socialism? Why is it moral to seek > power over others who mind their own business and never initiate physical > force on anyone? > > Andre: > For your information I do question the morality of socialism as a path > towards the good in the same way as I question the Western religious, > philosophic, democratic, political/economic path to the good. > > As to the second part of your question I will quote Pirsig: > 'What the Metaphysics of Quality indicates is that the twentieth-century > intellectual faith in man's basic goodness as spontaneous and natural is > disastrously naive. The ideal of a harmonious society in which everyone > without coercion cooperates happily with everyone else for the mutual good > of all is a devastating fiction' (Lila, p314). > > I don't need to tell you that Pirsig has the Anglo-American societies in > mind which he termed a 'rust-belt' (despite, or is it because of, Dynamic > Quality, which 'people' cannot responsibly 'channel') . He placed the > socialist variant on a higher moral plane. > Anyway, this observation concerns all societies not just socialist.( So > don't give me your McCarthyism! Where have you been the last fifty years?). > > Platt: > When I review the history of the 20th century I find the various forms of > socialism as practiced to be of far lower quality than capitalism. I was > under the impression you came to the same conclusion with your experience > in > China. Perhaps I was mistaken. > > Andre: > No, you are not mistaken Platt but it is not as black and white as you tend > to represent things. Both have virtues and both have flaws but one needs to > go back much earlier to get a clearer understanding of the evolution of > ideological positions,their (scientific) basis, where they split and why. > This helps to clarify their resultant conflicts which led to the disaster > and atrocities committed during the 20th Century. > Lila is a wonderful summery, in this sense, but not the whole thing. The > whole thing, as Pirsig stated is too big. > > Regards > Andre > > 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/
