dmb: (after providing us the reminder of the interwovenness of the Ethic of Protestantism and the Spirit of Capitalism by posting a quote from Weber).
Ian in response: I would say, that's a no-brainer, no apology required, who could possiby disagree. Andre: The reference to Weber brought me back to my student days where I, as budding social worker, bought and read Weber's book as part of my sociological studies. I found it revelatory then and it is good to be reminded of the pervasiveness of this 'ethic' as well as its 'spiritual' expression thereof. Given the MoQ, it shows us the emptiness of this 'spirituality' and the relativity of this 'ethic'. It is at this juncture that Mr. Pirsig indeed described capitalism as 'guided by mindless tradition'(LILA, p 224). I never quite understood this upon first and even second reading but, as the MoQ points out,and you, Dave, point out, nothing exists independently and nothing can arise independently. These are relationships carrying within themselves justifications that, on first reading seem quite unrelated and even contradictory but when seen from a Quality perspective become much more understandable. Am not convinced Ian, that dmb's concern is a 'no- brainer' ... it is very, very deep and suggests to me the question as to: how does one 'break' this religious conviction? ( it is not only confined to the Protestant part of Christianity believe me). How does one 'break' a mindless tradition'? Pirsig's analyses in LILA have taken us (among other things) to the intellectual level choosing between the biological or social level...which is it going to side with? And it continues to ask the question; what is the intellectual level going to do now? With whom does it side? Does capitalism glorify (and exploit) the biological level to the point of subjecting its (social based and intellectually inspired) values to serve these particular values intertwined with this religious ethic? It does point to the depth of entrenchment: a socially based ethic and an empty spirituality ( I am here reminded among other things, of Marcuse's 'One Dimensional Man'). I am a bit pessimistic about the side it chooses/has chosen. Again Ian, when you argue: Like MoQism surely it is just a means of understanding the mechanisms at work. We still have moral choices to make.) Yes, but lets keep the MoQ alive please and not reify it as an 'ism' but as the DQ/SQ 'understanding'.( i.e an ongoing tension between the two). ( I am afraid I am objecting to the word 'just'). For what it's worth. 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/
