Hi Dan --
[Ham, previously to Marsha]:
I think I may have stumbled unknowingly upon MoQ's Waterloo.
Pirsig defies epistemology by claiming that Quality exists
independently of man. This leads his followers to believe that it is
unrelated to desire, making desire a greedy, infectious state of
mind. Why else would Dan associate desire with only selfish
goals and motives?
[Dan, on 3/15];
Thank you for allowing me to set the record straight here. First of
all, RMP does not claim Quality exists independent of man. Quality
is experience. How can experince be independent of the experiencer?
So no, his "followers" do not believe Quality is unrelated to desire.
As I wrote Marsha, in the MOQ desire can be seen as biologically,
socially, and intellectually driven.
And if you've read my posts at all, you must realize I do not
associate desire with only selfish goals and motivations. Of course
you probably have no real reason to read my posts, unless they're
addressed to you...
Ham:
The concept of individual liberty and
social morality is derived from the desire of human beings to better their
collective situation, not "wreck" it. The development of science and
medicine was motivated by desire for the knowledge to alleviate suffering,
not "cause" it.
Dan:
Agree.
Ham:
Of course unbridled desire can lead to gluttony and aggrandisement. Too
much candy can cause a stomach ache. Too much power can breed tryanny. But
must it be sinful to "want" something? How can human civilization progress
without it? Besides, human beings have the rational capacity to temper
excess craving.
Dan:
Again, I agree with you here, though with the stipulation that most
human beings haven't the rational capacity to temper excess craving.
Hundreds of thousands of people die every year from smoking cigarettes
and drinking alcohol to excess. Obesity is rampant in developed and
even developing countries. Social and intellectual patterns have
evolved to curb excess biological cravings but many people suffer the
effects anyway.
Ham:
And, no, Dan; I do not believe for a moment that "Value and Quality exist
without the desire to possess them." To value something is to desire it.
If
Value could not inspire desire, we would have no way to realize it. And if
man lacked the capacity to discriminate between good and poor quality, or
to
choose what is of value, he would be reduced to robotic status.
Dan:
Have you ever been to an art museum and witnessed some unbelievably
incredible work of art? Did you feel the need to possess it; did the
desire arise to make it yours? Or did you simply feel a sense of awe?
And if you felt that sense of awe, wasn't that value? If you
understand what I am saying, then you see that Quality and desire are
not necessarily linked in any way, Ham.
Ham:
I'm sorry
if this epistemology conflicts with the Quality thesis; but it is a
common-sense view that merits some serious reckoning by the Pirsigians.
Dan:
Well, as far as the Quality thesis goes, I don't speak for others,
only myself. But I do have some little grounding in the MOQ, so I
appreciate the opportunity to expound on it.
Again, thank you for your thoughts, and I look forward to your response.
Dan
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
