On 4 Dec 2009 at 22:32, Andre Broersen wrote: > Platt to Andre: > What did McDonald's ever do to you? Did you get a bad bag of French > fries or something? Sounds to me that you, unlike Pirsig, are anti-free > market . > > Andre: > Hi Platt, no, McDonalds has never done anything to me. I have been > there once and have avoided it eversince. > But...this is not what you are saying or asking.
Yes, you're free to avoid McDonald's. That's the morality of a free market. Unless you would rather have some high-school dropout from the government tell you what you can and cannot eat. > Look Platt, I do not have all the answers, I am certainly not > anti-free market. The only thing I am trying to suggest is that DQ, as > it has found itself expressed in the free market, as DQ has found > itself expressed at the organic level as sex, as it found itself at > the social level (similar to the free market) as celebrity, does that > mean that we have to have sex as celebrities in the free market all > the time? Is this the ultimate Q morality? The moral levels are opposed to one another. So your scenario is bogus. > I am sure that there is a point at which our interpretations of the > MoQ will diverge but as Pirsig states very clearly, a dynamic Quality > without latching is degenerative. You cannot live on DQ alone. Agree. > And this is where we diverge (I think). The DQ of the free market does > just that. It produces for the sake of producing. It invents for the > sake of inventing. It gives information for the sake of giving > information. It distributes for the sake of distributing. It feeds for > the sake of feeding. It kills for the sake of killing. First, the free market doesn't deliberately kill. Governments do that, sometimes necessarily to defeat biological criminals. Second, the free market produces, invents, gives information and distributes for the sake of creating surpluses, otherwise known as making a profit. > This is where > the Giant comes in.It is a self-perpetuating monster not caring for a > few bodies more or less, not caring for a few brilliant ideas more or > less. It looks, takes, swallows, burps and farts, and shits, and that > is the end of it. All neatly MaC packaged and laundered on the market > place. Next please!!! The Giant can be of two different types -- a Giant that allows individuals free choice and a Giant who dictates what an individual can and cannot do. Most Giants are a combination of the two extremes, but the one that provides freedom to choose is morally preferable (capable of responding to DQ) than one that doesn't. > I think that this is what Pirsig means when he says that it 'can never > be contained by any intellectual formula' (LILA, p 225) and our > economists and politicians are responding AFTER the events. > > The market is a dynamic which the politicians and economists are still > trying to find out the logic of...there isn't!!! And they try to > respond logically... pfhhhhhhhhh. It cannot be done! Agree. That's exactly why socialism's central planners fail. > What I am trying to get at with you is that this pattern has been > allowed to set off on a path of its own...without any moral > considerations. DQ is without morals (or rather, it is a-moral). It is > not this not that. This moral battle is being fought out at, and > between the SQ patterned levels. Disagree. DQ is the most moral of all. "Its only perceived good is freedom and its only perceived evil is static quality itself-any pattern of one-sided fixed values that tries to contain and kill the ongoing free force of life." A society that encourages response to this life force is more moral than one that doesn't, just as a society that defends intellectual values is more moral than one that defends static traditions. > Now, before I get carried away I simply posit for you that this free > market energy is channeled to the few and wasted on the majority and > that we, as SQ have a moral obligation to balance that. An MoQ > attitude will show the goodness, the betterness of freedom and > compassion. To me nothing is more compassionate that a system that provides goods and services that history has shown benefits mankind in countless ways and raises the standard of living for all. > There are over one billion people starving on this planet! > > All our fucking intelligence is being used and abused by MaC economic > and MaC political PoV's and this is a classic example of a lower > evolutionary level dominating and subjugating (for its own gains) a > higher level of evolution. > > In MoQ terms this is an immoral act! And I don't give a shit whose MaC it is. Seems to me all our "fucking" intelligence is being used to 1) improve man's lot or 2) defend intelligence from being destroyed by lower patterns. Problems arise when a cabal of intellectuals with power to enforce their ideas get together and think they know what's best for the rest of us. > In this sense Bodvar's SOL makes absolute sense. Except that some here > on the MoQ can go through this SOM shit and arrive at a MOQ Quality > understanding. ..going through the world of forms, through to the > world of formlessness and then returning to the world of forms and > seeing DQ. HuH? Sorry. I don't follow you. > Enough Platt. Whatever patterns you show sometimes, you are a good > sport in responding the way you did. But as I know so well, this is > not a guarantee for the future! That we have different views and different interpretations of the MOQ should not be surprising to anyone. The danger is in insisting there is one right way to think and to demonize those who are thought by some to stray from the party line Regards, Platt. 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/
