Wow John, how cool! Yes, that book and the making of a counter culture have
influenced me too, but in a different direction I imagine.

We must get into Where the Wasteland Ends, I was going to get to it
eventually. He, too, like Pirsig, like Husserl defines and describes the
problem, the crisis of the West, very well. I just think they point to the
wrong solution.

Thanks for the link and your comments. I hope you registered, or soon will
for the blog. Make a comment or a post when the spirit strikes.
http://www.thelovingorganization.com/crisis/


Pick it up tomorrow sometime,

Sleep well,
Jon
**


On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 1:13 AM, John Carl <[email protected]> wrote:

> Jon,  Thanks for that link to the summer of love, I got to meet Theodore
> Roszak who's Where the Wasteland Ends, was a big influence in my life.
>
>
> I stumbled across a link I thought you'd find interesting and since one
> good
> turn deserves another...
>
>
> from http://www.city-journal.org/html/17_4_oh_to_be.html
>
> "The thinness of the new atheism is evident in its approach to our
> civilization, which until recently was religious to its core. To regret
> religion is, in fact, to regret our civilization and its monuments, its
> achievements, and its legacy. And in my own view, the absence of religious
> faith, provided that such faith is not murderously intolerant, can have a
> deleterious effect upon human character and personality. If you empty the
> world of purpose, make it one of brute fact alone, you empty it (for many
> people, at any rate) of reasons for gratitude, and a sense of gratitude is
> necessary for both happiness and decency. For what can soon, and all too
> easily, replace gratitude is a sense of entitlement. Without gratitude, it
> is hard to appreciate, or be satisfied with, what you have: and life will
> become an existential shopping spree that no product satisfies.
>
>
> The obligation of gratitude is sufficient to drive the self-obsessed mad."
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Jon Bennett <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > dmb and all,
> >
> > I accidentally sent the last message before I was finished. I was saying
> > that these principles are ways the world is, and ways of viewing the
> world
> > and that no one view really can fully incorporate both views, as Pirsig
> > claims. Pirsig favors dynamic quality, just as the I Ching with its two
> > fundamental principles, favors yin, or the change principles.
> >
> > Both these systems, moq and the I Ching, are essentially the same thing.
> > Both favor the changing, dynamic, becoming principle.
> > They both incorporate a weaker version of the other principle, but not as
> > it
> > would exist in a truly static, or yang system of thought. It's called
> after
> > all the book of changes, not the book of the changeless, or static, for a
> > reason.
> >
> > This division is the same basic division you see in all eastern thought,
> > and
> > neoplatonism. It is the Apollo and Dionysius split of the Greeks. We see
> > the
> > Greek religious ground motive of the flowing river of dynamic change
> > and becoming of the cthonic, earth lydeities pitted against the Olympian
> > deities of form-justice, beauty, etc., the changless element of the sky.
> >
> > In my older writings I used to refer to this same split as solar vs lunar
> > mythic traditions. Moq is a lunar mythic-religious and philosophical
> > system.
> > It tries to incorporate the solar qualities, but does it only in a
> reduced
> > form. That is the lunar or (dq) way of seeing the world SEES the solar
> (sq)
> > reality differently than the solar (sq) sees itself and the lunar (dq).
> > That
> > is both views see and treat their two primary components differently.
> > That's
> > where the deceit its. Moq favors the dynamic reality over the static. And
> > this sabotages its rational element even though it is often unseen.
> >
> >
> >
> > .On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 12:51 AM, Jon Bennett <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > dmb, an all,
> > >
> > > Someone teach me how to do the quoting thing in a reply. What's the
> > secret.
> > >
> > > Let's back up and try to define our terms a bit more, and look more
> > > carefully at world views, and the ideas behind them, so we can trace
> > their
> > > influence.  The Enlightenment is actually a very sticky-wicket to
> define.
> > > And there were different phases in different countries. In the early
> > stages
> > > the Enlightenment was based on Christian theism, and later became quite
> > > atheistic, of course, in France and elswhere.
> > >
> > > But there were at least 2 Enlightenments,a French-German and a
> > > Anglo-American. Furthermore, the Enlightenment was not as influential
> in
> > > America's formative years. So I'd like to see you present some evidence
> > dmb,
> > > for your and Pirsig's claim (and Campbell would agree with you) that
> > human
> > > rights, democracy, were grounded in Enlightenment thought.
> > >
> > > One source I would reccomend to you is Alan Bloom's "The Closing of the
> > > American Mind". There's a chapter in there called "Two Revolutions
> > > Two States of Nature", describing the philosophical and political
> > > differences between the French and American revolutions.
> > >
> > > The American revolution was more strongly influenced by the thought of
> > > Montesquei, and Burke and the Bible, specifically, the book of
> > Deutoronomy.
> > > The American revolution and political institutions were strongly
> > influenced
> > > by both the first and second great awakenings and their grounding in
> and
> > > return to the ideas of the Protestant Reformation.
> > >
> > > Even if you claim the Deism of the Enlightenment as an influence on
> these
> > > rights, and freedom this is still a far cry away from what Pirsig is
> > > proposing with his Moq, which you, yourself claim as anti-theistic
> > >
> > > Even for the Deist like Jefferson the unalienable rights of man, his
> > > freedom, was endowed by a Creator, not by static or dynamic patterns of
> > > quality.
> > >
> > > Also, Pirsig talks out of both sides of his mouth. Or more to the point
> > has
> > > such a lose philosophy that he can stretch and distort it to meet his
> > fancy
> > > or fantasy, or whim as the case may be. That's why I think it is flaky
> > and
> > > deceitful.
> > >
> > > Even from and eastern perspective there is a saying Lao Tzu walks in
> the
> > > woods, Confucius in society. Moq is closer to Taoism, not the moral
> > > structure of Confucius.
> > >
> > > Pirsig, and his philosophy, like all philosophies that deny the
> > > Creator-creation distinction, try to have their cake, and not eat it
> too!
> > > This is the fate of all philosophies that focus only on the creation.
> > They
> > > all have two oscillating principles that forever switch back and forth.
> > >
> > > I'd like to also point out and develop in another post how moq and all
> > > other such systems that are based on two fundamental principles, really
> > > favor only one of these principles-not both! This is where and how they
> > > deceive. For these principles say static and dynamic quality are not
> just
> > > ways the world is believed to be, they are ways of VIEWING the world.
> And
> > > there is no one view that truly incorportates both views.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 5:00 PM, david buchanan <
> [email protected]
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Jon said:
> > >> The issues of political freedom, the respect for human rights,
> including
> > >> women's rights and civil rights did not emerge from such a world view
> as
> > the
> > >> moq, and it is indeed alien to the recognition of such rights.
> > >>
> > >> dmb says:
> > >>
> > >> Well, the ideas about human rights and political freedom emerged from
> > >> Enlightenment philosophers. The MOQ supports these ideas quite
> > vigorously
> > >> and explicitly, although for different reasons than the original
> > thinkers
> > >> might have. "Freedom of speech; freedom of assembly, of travel; trial
> by
> > >> jury; habeas corpus; government by consent - these 'human rights' are
> > all
> > >> intellectual-vs-society issues. According to the Metaphysics of
> Quality
> > >> these 'human rights' have not just a sentimental basis, but a
> rational,
> > >> metaphysical basis. They are essential to the evolution of a higher
> > level of
> > >> life from a lower level of life. They are for real." (Lila 307)
> > >> Jon said:
> > >> I'm sure many on the list are familiar with the work of Joseph
> Campbell.
> > >> his work is very supportive of Eastern thought, and Prisig's views.
> > Surely
> > >> you will admit he is knowledgeable of the cultures and myths of the
> > world,
> > >> and is an expert in comparative mythology.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> dmb says:
> > >>
> > >> Yea, I'm a big fan. In Lila, Pirsig recommend's Joseph Campbell's
> "Masks
> > >> of God". He says if you really want to understand what the social
> level
> > is
> > >> all about, that's the book to read. Notice how Campbell echoes what
> > Pirsig
> > >> just said about rights and freedom where he says, "they are the truly
> > great
> > >> "new thing" that we do indeed represent to the world and that
> > constitutes
> > >> our Occidental revelation of a properly human spiritual ideal, true to
> > the
> > >> highest potentiality of our species".
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Jon said:
> > >>
> > >> You have these freedoms because you were seen as created in the very
> > image
> > >> of God. And you were endowed by your Creator with these rights because
> > your
> > >> life was seen as sacred. Not a static, certainly not a dynamic
> pattern,
> > but
> > >> a child of the living God. That is the source of freedom, personal and
> > >> political.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> dmb says:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Definitely disagree with you there. As you just saw, Pirsig thinks
> that
> > >> our rights and freedoms have a rational, evolutionary basis. The MOQ
> is
> > not
> > >> theistic generally and in some ways it is even anti-theistic. Based on
> > your
> > >> apparent commitments to such beliefs, I suspect you won't find much
> > comfort
> > >> in the MOQ.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> _________________________________________________________________
> > >> The New Busy think 9 to 5 is a cute idea. Combine multiple calendars
> > with
> > >> Hotmail.
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?tile=multicalendar&ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_5
> > >>  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/md/archives.html
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > 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/md/archives.html
> >
> 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/md/archives.html
>
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/md/archives.html

Reply via email to