prodictability = predictability   prodict = predict

clumsy me :(


2013/8/28 Eddo Rats <[email protected]>

> Hi X and all
>
> X says:
> Robert Pirsigs answers to the problem:
> "the Metaphysics of Quality answers, 'The fundamental purpose of knowledge
> is to Dynamically improve and preserve society.
> It says it is immoral for intellect to be dominated by society for the same
> reasons it is immoral for children to be dominated by their parents. But
> that
> doesn't mean that children should assassinate their parents, and it doesn't
> mean intellectuals should assassinate society."
>  "What's good is freedom from domination by any static pattern, but that
> freedom
> doesn't have to be obtained by the destruction of the patterns themselves."
>
> You've been a good Parrot to copy this from Lila X and you know jack shit
> about the my use of Therozine, These remarks only emphasize weakness and
> ignorance of you as a person from my perspective..........your choice.
>
> The problem with morally judging people based on their intellectual
> values is that one of the highest intellectual value's is "prodictability"
> every scientist with a theory want's his or her theorem been seen proven.
> Through the whole spectrum of scientific disciplines everybody want's to
> aim for the rigourous proof like its been done in natural sciences.
> Nowaday's it's common culture in western society. Big insurance companies
> thrive on our addiction to prodictability. Even the word "reason" implies
> causality, it implies the effort of builing verbal intellectual systems
> that give us the illusion of sertaity that we are able to predict.
>
> Pirsig says;"the Metaphysics of Quality answers, 'The fundamental purpose
> of knowledge is to Dynamically improve and preserve society.
>
> The paradox is that with our intellectual arrogance believing to know and
> prodict we eliminate room for DQ of which Pirsig say's is nessicary to
> improve society.
>
> How do you count for this in your intellectual judgements?
>
>
>
>
> 2013/8/28 X Acto <[email protected]>
>
>>
>>
>>  [Ron]
>>  They are beliefs and criticism, but they are based in Bob Pirsigs idea
>>  that we can not only judge other people but other cultures based on
>> their value of intellectual quality. we most certainly can morally judge
>> people based on their intellectual
>> values.
>>
>>
>> Eddo responds philosophically with:
>> Prove you can! or you're only talking intellectual dickshit!
>>
>>
>> [Ron]
>> O.k. Eddo, take your thorazine and allow me to clarify, I had said
>> It was Robert Pirsigs belief that we can, and here is the proof of
>> him having said this in quotes:
>>
>> "Phaedrus thought the reason this movement has been so hard to understand
>> is that
>> 'understanding' itself, static intellect, was its enemy." -Lila chptr 23
>>
>> [Ron]
>> Notice how Pirsig identifies the problem, the mistake of making
>> understanding
>> itself the enemy.  In his book "Lila" he explains in chapters 22-24 how
>> cultural
>> relativism "From the perspective of a subject-object science, the world
>> is a completely
>> purposeless, valueless place. There is no point in anything. Nothing is
>> right
>> and nothing is wrong. Everything just functions, like machinery. There is
>> nothing morally wrong with being lazy, nothing morally wrong with lying,
>> with theft, with suicide, with murder, with genocide. There is nothing
>> morally
>> wrong because there are no morals, just functions." coupled with the
>> hippie
>> movement ideals:
>> "the Hippies undermined both static and intellectual patterns. Nothing
>> better
>> has been introduced to replace them. The result has been a drop in both
>> social
>> and intellectual quality. "
>> Are the cause of all the cultural paralyisis and the inhibiting of
>> dynamic intellectual
>> growth.
>>
>> Robert Pirsigs answers to the problem:
>> "the Metaphysics of Quality answers, 'The fundamental purpose of knowledge
>> is to Dynamically improve and preserve society.
>> It says it is immoral for intellect to be dominated by society for the
>> same
>> reasons it is immoral for children to be dominated by their parents. But
>> that
>> doesn't mean that children should assassinate their parents, and it
>> doesn't
>> mean intellectuals should assassinate society."
>>
>> "What's good is freedom from domination by any static pattern, but that
>> freedom
>> doesn't have to be obtained by the destruction of the patterns
>> themselves."
>>
>> "The ideal of a harmonious society in which everyone without coercion
>> cooperates
>> happily with everyone else for the mutual good of all is a devastating
>> fiction."
>>
>> [Ron]
>> Here is the part that you asked me to prove Pirsig wrote:
>>
>> "Cultures can be graded and judged morally according to their
>> contribution to
>> the evolution of life.
>> A culture that supports the dominance of social values over biological
>> values
>> is an absolutely superior culture to one that does not, and a culture that
>> supports the dominance of intellectual values over social values is
>> absolutely
>> superior to one that does not. It is immoral to speak against a people
>> because
>> of the color of their skin, or any other genetic characteristic because
>> these
>> are not changeable and don't matter anyway. But it is not immoral to speak
>> against a person because of his cultural characteristics if those cultural
>> characteristics are immoral. These are changeable and they do matter."
>>
>> Notice "if those cultural characteristics are immoral", what does
>> Pirsig mean
>> by immoral ? any pattern that inhibits the contribution to the dynamic
>> evolution of life.
>> In Pirsigs four level evolutionary model, intellectual quality is the
>> highest
>> and most moral static pattern of evolution.
>>
>> "And this is a war in which intellect, to end the paralysis of society,
>> has to
>> know whose side it is on, and support that side, never undercut it. Where
>> biological values are undermining social values, intellectuals must
>> identify
>> social behavior, no matter what its ethnic connection, and support it all
>> the
>> way without restraint. Intellectuals must find biological behavior, no
>> matter
>> what its ethnic connection, and limit or destroy destructive biological
>> patterns
>> with complete moral ruthlessness, the way a doctor destroys germs, before
>> those
>> biological patterns destroy civilization itself."
>> This city of dreadful night. What a disaster!
>> lila chptr 24
>>
>> [Ron concludes]
>> I think the same could be said for the undermining of the standards for
>> intellectual
>> excellence, those of clarity, coherence and consistancy in meaning. I
>> believe Intellectuals
>> must identify intellectual behaviour, no matter what it's ethnic  or
>> biological connection
>> and limit or destroy destructive patterns with complete moral
>> ruthlessness before they
>> destroy the intellectual community itself.
>> I understand the need for divertisty in ideas and thought but I think
>> there is a good case
>> to be made for identifying intellectualy destructive behaviour and
>> rooting it out.
>>
>> ...
>> 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