dmb said:
These [social and intellectual] are discrete and sometimes conflicting levels
of values. This distinction is on full display in the history of the 20th
century, as Pirsig explains in some detail. Fascism and fundamentalism are
essentially reactionary, anti-intellectual movements.
John replied:
Mussolini was anti-intellectual? Seemed to me he was bent upon eliminating
earlier mythic foolishness that impeded progress. Much like yourself. And I
don't recall fundamentalism being a big deal back when Pirsig wrote Lila. Much
less ZAMM. Show me the reference and I'll kiss your arse.
dmb says:
Pucker up, pal, because the textual evidence clearly shows that you are
mistaken. Pirsig uses exactly the same words (anti-intellectual and
reactionary) to describe fascism and he describes the fundamentalist opponents
of evolution as "religious fanatics and ignorant Tennessee hillbillies" and
"church bigots" who were defending "the old static religious patterns of the
past." Bill Nye the science debated a creationist just the other day. I mean,
this conflict continues to this very day. This is not some trivial point about
obscure philosophical abstractions. It's about the world we're inhabiting right
now. I think it's important to know which end is up so you can be on the right
side of this conflict. It seems pretty clear to me that you are not, John. Your
not-so-covert theism and your anti-intellectual attitudes give you away as a
person dominated by social values. Maybe your pride is served by blurring the
lines, pretending there is no conflict between them, the this is a tremendous
disservice to anyone who's interested in the MOQ.
"Communism and socialism, programs for intellectual control over society, were
confronted by the reactionary forces of fascism, a program for the social
control of intellect. ... The gigantic power of socialism and fascism, which
have overwhelm this century, is explained by a conflict of levels of
evolution." -- Robert Pirsig, Lila
"The gigantic power of socialism and fascism, which have overwhelmed this
century, is explained by a conflict of levels of evolution. This conflict
explains the driving force behind Hitler [Mussolini invented fascism and was
literally Hitler's partner in crime] not as an insane search for power but as
an all-consuming glorification of social authority and hatred of
intellectualism. His anti-Semitism was fueled by anti-intellectualism. His
hatred of communists was fueled by anti-intellectualism. His exaltation of the
German volk was fueled by it. His fanatic persecution of any kind of
intellectual freedom was driven by it. In the United States the economic and
social upheaval was not so great as in Europe, but Franklin Roosevelt and the
New Deal, nevertheless, became the center of a lesser storm between social and
intellectual forces." -- Robert Pirsig, Lila
"It was this issue of intellect versus society that made the Scopes trial of
1925 such a journalistic sensation. In that trial a Tennessee schoolteacher,
John Scopes, was charged with illegally teaching Darwinian evolution. ... his
lawyer, Clarence Darrow was just taking easy shots at a toothless tiger. Only
religious fanatics and ignorant Tennessee hillbillies opposed the teaching of
Evolution. When that trial is seen as a conflict of social and intellectual
values its meaning emerges. Scopes and Darrow were defending academic freedom
but, more importantly, they were prosecuting the old static religious patterns
of the past. They gave intellectuals a warm feeling of arriving somewhere they
had been waiting to arrive for a long time. Church bigots, pillars of society
who for centuries had viciously attacked and defamed intellectual who disagreed
with them, were now getting some of it back." -- Robert Pirsig, Lila 273
"Phædrus saw nothing wrong with this ritualistic religion as long as the
rituals are seen as merely a static portrayal of Dynamic Quality, a sign-post
which allows socially pattern-dominated people to see Dynamic Quality. The
danger has always been that the rituals, the static patterns, are mistaken for
what they merely represent and are allowed to destroy the Dynamic Quality they
were originally intended to preserve." -- Robert Pirsig, Lila 385
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
