dmb, dmb says: > You're mixing up the levels, as I already tried to explain a day or two > ago... > > "Pirsig makes a case that intellectual values should be in charge of > society BUT, he says, there is a flaw (genetic defect) in the form of > rationality that has inherited this task. That is where the problem of SOM > resides.
John: I guess I'm still confused. Isn't this just asserting that SOM is in charge of society? I readily agree that SOM is a problem, i.e. has a genetic defect. And this statement above claims that SOM has inherited this task. So that just makes my point - SOM is in charge of the Giant. Now my question about this is whether this relationship between SOM and the Giant might actually be a necessary relation. That is, a different kind of metaphysics would produce a different kind of society. Pirsig said that the American Indian had a society that was closer to the MoQ but the American Indian's society is far inferior in the power and control over objects and subjects and thus is doomed to be a 2nd rate society. If SOM has all the power, then what can be done? dmb: > I think maybe you want to refer to SOM as the intellectual level values > that rule society, but not as social values. You see the difference? J: Sure. I thought I made this point where I said it'd be better to say SOP than SOM. But regardless, yes. Metaphysical patterns of the 4th level, not the 3rd. dmb: > The culture is comprised of both social and intellectual values and the > question in Lila is "which one is going to run the show?" So one of the > biggest questions is how to expand rationality beyond SOM so that society > has better leadership, so to speak. That's what the MOQ is, basically. A > picture of that expanded rationality, one that can lead society without the > problems of SOM,.." > > > John: Yes, but if that expanded rationality lacks strength, relative to the SOM rules which amplify ego and power, then it's not going to work. We need a way of translating betterness (right) into power (might). I don't see any clear way to that. dmb: > AND, I would add, since Pirsig and others have already rejected SOM we can > see that it's not necessary or inevitable. John: Sure, you could choose to live like an Indian. But if you want real power, then maybe it is necessary to live in a repressive society. And strive to be on the oppressive side rather than the oppressed. Sure we can ignore all that - it's called "being philosophical about things" But does this get anything done? This is the crux of my conundrum. John 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
