Ian said:
Nothing wrong with politics Platt, just partisan politics that is a product of
SOMism. Left right left right left right subject object subject object ....
Zzzzzz
dmb says:
I don't see how it makes any sense to dismiss partisan politics as a product of
SOM. As Pirsig paints it, the conflict between right and left is a conflict
between social and intellectual values. It's a moral battle and an evolutionary
struggle. Two or three chapters of Lila are dedicated to an explanation of this
conflict, with many specific examples from history and politics. And yet you're
bored by the left-right conflict in our politics?
"...a culture that supports the dominance of intellectual values over social
values is absolutely superior to one that does not." (Lila, p.311)
"That's what neither the socialist nor the capitalist ever got figured out.
>From a static point of view, socialism is more moral than capitalism. It's a
higher form of evolution. It is an intellectually guided society, not just a
society that is guided by mindless traditions. That's what gives socialism its
drive. But what the socialist left out and what has all but killed their whole
undertaking is an absence of a concept of indefinite DQ. You go to any
socialist city and it's always a dull place because there's little DQ. On the
other hand the conservatives who keep trumpeting about the virtues of free
enterprise are normally just supporting their own self-interest. They are just
doing the usual cover-up for the rich in their age-old exploitation of the
poor. Some of them seem to sense there is also something mysteriously virtuous
in a free enterprise system and you can see them struggling to put it into
words but they don't have the metaphysical vocabulary for it any more
than the socialists do." (expanded a bit by dmb)
"It is not that Victorian social economic patterns are more moral than
socialist intellectual economic patterns. Quite the opposite. They are less
moral as static patterns go."
Now think about social level values as Pirsig describes them and then read
Altemeyers description of right-wing authoritarians. It's quite obvious to me
that Pirsig's portrait of the neo-Victorians is well supported by Altemeyers'
findings. I've seen other studies that say the same thing. And it's also pretty
obvious that the tea baggers fit into the general pattern of other social level
reactionaries. The following three paragraphs are quotes...
"According to research by Altemeyer, right-wing authoritarians tend to exhibit
cognitive errors and symptoms of faulty reasoning. Specifically, they are more
likely to make incorrect inferences from evidence and to hold contradictory
ideas that result from compartmentalized thinking. They are also more likely to
uncritically accept insufficient evidence that supports their beliefs, and they
are less likely to acknowledge their own limitations. Nevertheless, there is no
connection between authoritarianism and either low or high intelligence. In
terms of the five factor model of personality, authoritarians generally score
lower on openness to experience and slightly higher on conscientiousness.
Altemeyer suggested that authoritarian politicians are more likely to be in the
Conservative or Reform party in Canada, or the Republican Party in the United
States. They generally have a conservative economic philosophy, are highly
nationalistic, oppose abortion, support capital punishment, oppose gun control
legislation, and do not value social equality. The RWA scale reliably
correlates with political party affiliation, reactions to Watergate,
pro-capitalist attitudes, religious orthodoxy, and acceptance of covert
governmental activities such as illegal wiretaps. Although authoritarianism is
correlated with conservative political ideology, not all authoritarians are
conservative, and not all conservatives are authoritarian. It is also worth
noting that many authoritarians have no interest in politics.
Authoritarians are generally more favorable to punishment and control than
personal freedom and diversity. For example, they are more willing to suspend
constitutional guarantees of liberty such as the Bill of Rights. They are more
likely to advocate strict, punitive sentences for criminals, and they report
that they obtain personal satisfaction from punishing such people. They tend to
be ethnocentric and prejudiced against racial and ethnic minorities, and
homosexuals."
dmb
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
