Hi Arlo, > [David] > SOM has the worlds academia caught in a metaphysical trap. > > [Arlo interjects] > I wanted to comment on this, because it is both a common sentiment here and > one that presents a false distinction. > > First, SOM's trap isn't an affliction suffered only by academics, it is a > lens that has trapped (in its largest sense) the populations of the West. SOM > has the Western world caught in a metaphysical trap, would be the more > accurate starting point.
Yes, absolutely. I mentioned specifically academia not because of how unimportant it is, but because of how important it is and it's where the MOQ would have great impact. > The next step is to look for sub-populations, or subcultures, within the West > where the effects of SOM's lens are the most entrenched. Here my observations > point to the myriad communities of the Academy to be by-and-large LESS > dominated by S/O thinking than most "non-academic populations". Although we > typically see the "physical sciences" most dominated by S/O thinking, even > here their is hope (certainly most visible at the higher ends of graduate > study) that mainstream S/O thinking is- at least- being challenged. > > In philosophy and the liberal arts, I think this is even more evident, and > many disciplines are moving into fields that do not adhere to "subjectivity" > or "objectivity" but alternatives to these lenses. I think one confusion is > that everything "non-MOQ" is ipso facto "SOM", and this is simply absurd. > Pirsig's MOQ may be the best alternative to SOM but it isn't the only > intellectual consideration that is attempting to move away from an S/O lens. > Cultural-historical psychology, emergence theories, semiotics, > structurationists, even the oft cited scholars of James and Dewey, all these > (and others) are at least questioning the primacy of subjects and objects, > even if they lack the language of Pirsig's MOQ. >From my lack of academic knowledge I don't know much about these to make a >quick comment here. I do of course know James and Dewey however. > This isn't to say that challenges don't exist, or entrenched ideas lack > power, but I'd say the effects of the SOM lens are stronger among most > non-academic communities, and the ongoing trend towards consumerism noted in > ZMM is one example of the ruinous outcome of SOM on the larger populations as > a whole. Well the MOQ also supports materialism but it does put it in perspective yes. Thanks Arlo, I'll be sure to give each of Cultural-historical psychology, emergence theories, semiotics and structurationists a look. -David. 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
