On May 31st dmb said:
Pirsig formulates the pragmatic theory of truth so that it is subordinate to
Quality. ..."Truth is a static intellectual pattern WITHIN a larger entity
called Quality." (Emphasis is Pirsig's) On the same page he explains how the
MOQ makes "it clear that the good to which truth is subordinate is intellectual
and Dynamic Quality".
On Sun, 2 Jun 2013 Djh said:
The MOQ expands rationality by allowing us to discuss *all* values not just
intellectual values. Included as part of all values are even those undefined
better values which create intellectual patterns to begin with. From this
Dynamic Quality perspective static quality is degenerate.
There are different pespectives of the MOQ dmb. There is the intellectual
perspective which you seem to be stuck in. And there is also a 'perspective'
of the MOQ which is *outside*, *before* and actually the 'perspective' which
*creates* the intellectual level. This is the non-'perspective' of DQ. To
repeat myself - the MOQ *expands rationality* by including this 'perspective'
and other value perspectives as part of its metaphysical structure. From a DQ
or strictly mystic understanding - static quality is evil and degenerate. RMP
and myself can intellectually say that. Why can't you?
Ron replied:
But this perspective DOES NOT EXIST. No one has it! No one can! Why include it
if it is meaningless? Why include it if it has no value? It does not
exist....there is no gods eye view. It does not exist djh only for Bodvar and
his followers ...You are interpreting selected quotes to support your
interpretation of what Pirsig is saying which contradicts other Pirsig quotes,
but that is ok you say because Pirsig accepts contradiction and so this
supports the fact that your interpretation makes no sense. It must be correct
then. yikes!
dmb says:
Yes, this reminds me of Marsha's dual perspectives. There is the MOQ as we find
it in Pirsig's written works and then there is some flip-floppy, half-baked,
quasi-mystical gibberish that makes no sense to anyone. Ironically, this latter
"perspective" serves as an unintelligible basis for countless anti-intellectual
assertions. This is just one of many, many examples wherein faux-mysticism is
used to evade or derail anything intellectual.
Here, for example, we are supposedly discussing theories of truth, and the
MOQ's theory of truth in particular. So of course it's time to break a big bowl
of anti-intellectual Haterade. As DJH sees it I am not bringing relevant
evidence to the topic of truth but rather I'm "stuck" in the intellectual
perspective.
Despite the fact that Pirsig says "truth is a static intellectual pattern
WITHIN a larger entity called Quality," Harding continues to insist that
anything static is degenerate and evil. He simply ignores Pirsig's formulation.
As I tried to show in various ways, Pirsig's theory of truth makes "it clear
that the good to which truth is subordinate is intellectual and Dynamic
Quality". Pirsig's pragmatic theory of truth is formulated so that that
intellectual static truth is SUBORDINATE to DQ. And that is the formula that
prevents it from being degenerate.
What would be the point of talking about the MOQ's theory of truth if, as DJ
Harding asserts, all "static quality is evil and degenerate"? If that's true,
then any truth theory is degenerate. Any philosophical discussion would be a
form of evil and we'd all very naughty people for joining this little club,
right? Nope. That's not just wrong, it cuts against the whole grain of the MOQ.
It defies the most relevant textual evidence. It's contradictory and incoherent.
I mean, just think about the phrase at the heart of all this nonsense: "static
quality is evil and degenerate". If it's evil and degenerate, then "quality" is
certainly the wrong word for it. Harding's phrase makes about as much sense as
saying, "good is bad" or "right is wrong". If static quality is evil, why not
say that the world is composed of nothing but evil? Yea, that's Pirsig is
trying to say. He wanted to expand and improve rationality so that he could
then utterly condemn it. Yea, that makes sense.
Again - put this evidence in your anti-intellectual pipe and smoke it.
In the AHP transcript Pirsig is asked, so what's next? What do we do with the
levels and codes? His answer leans quite heavily on intellectual quality. Here
I think we can see that anti-intellectualism is quite antithetical to Pirsig
project and his wishes concerning the fate of that project. He wants the MOQ to
trickle down from the intellectuals! He's happy that Oxford thinkers think his
thinking is great. And, as you can clearly see, Pirsig is a totally degenerate
bastard. How can the man sleep at night? How can he live with the crimes he's
committed here? ;-)
quote------------
I think intellect is a guide for society and if you have a good set of
intellectual principles, a good metaphysics, then you are going to guide
society better. I am hoping that this MOQ will be [..] integrated into society.
I am here today to help integrate this MOQ into society. I see it going into
the Law. There's a huge problem with morals - all the time - and if they can
use the MOQ to improve decisions made on the bench… Boy! That's a real gain for
all of us you see, for society.
So you say, okay, once you understand these relationships, what next? With
"next" comes the action and the action in this case will be social action. And
I don't mean rush out and grab a banner or anything. I just mean there should
be a natural filtration into, first of all the intellectual system and then
from the intellectual system… (aside: I kept telling my publishers: "Look,
don't let this book go. This is a kind of a trickle down book. It's going to
start with the intellectuals at a very high level and they are going to tell
people at a little lower level and they are going to tell people at a little
lower level. So I got panned all over England partly because the book sounded
so anti-Victorian… it was their grandmother you know, their queen. They didn't
like that but one place really praised it. They said: "This author is a great
thinker" and that was Oxford [University]. You see it's going to trickle down
from Oxford through the rest of English society. Then I hope it is going to go
into… common life by the mechanisms which we now have, by which things go into
common life.
I was shut out at the University of Chicago. My normal dharma, my normal career
was to go and get a PhD, present this thesis and move on into the intellectual
world and teach at a University. They shut me out. So I said, okay, I'll go
around you… I'll go around you. I'll appeal to the public…
I'll tell you another story. Now this was after I went to the hospital there -
at the University of Chicago - the psychiatrist interviewed me and… I told him
the story of this conflict which occurred there. So he went over to see the
Chairman of the Committee for Analysis of Ideas and Study of Methods. He came
back and said: "I have never seen such a bastard in my life'. He says, 'the guy
screamed at me, he shouted at me."
This psychiatrist went to the President of the University of Chicago, and he
got that man reversed and I was re-allowed into the University of Chicago as a
result of his efforts. I have never forgotten that. There was a moral action on
the part of this man. He didn't just study me and say "I see what his problem
is". He took it upon himself to change that person's mind. The Chairman of the
Committee for Analysis of Ideas and Study of Methods died some time ago. He
never would communicate with anybody who wrote to him about my book. He was a
very famous philosopher, a very famous figure but a totally static person of
the most outrageous Right. He was Richard McKeon, I don't know if you ever
heard of him. He was the Aristotle man at the University of Chicago. He is the
guy who organised the Great Books. And for me to walk into his class and tell
him: "Let's get rid of Aristotle" was just outrageous and of course you know
who they got rid of…
end quote-----------
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
