Hi Wim Nusselder:
It's hard for me to leave Pirsig's "quotes aside for awhile" because they
tells us what the MOQ means. You are right, of course, that we can take
the levels as Pirsig presented them and assign to them whatever
meanings we wish. But if we are looking for what Pirsig says about the
levels, then it seems to me we are limited pretty much to what he says,
not what we would like him to say. We can surely disagree with the
MOQ, but first we have to agree on what to disagree about.
When one suggests that perhaps terrorism can be seen to be part of
different patterns of value simultaneously or is "intellectual" in any way,
I immediately suspect a softening of resolve to take society's side
against biology. I return to Pirsig's warning, "Thus, throughout this
century we have seen over and over again that intellectuals weren't
blaming crime on man's biological nature, but on the social patterns
that had repressed this biological nature." (22) This is the error that
can "destroy civilization itself."
So sure, it's reasonable to point out that matyr status is a social value
and that flying a plane into a building requires some intellectual quality.
But let not those thoughts split apart and diminish the MOQ view as
specifically expressed by Pirsig--that the essential nature of the attack
was biological and should be responded to as such.
The throne example is indeed a good one to show that something can
be in more than one level, depending on one's perspective at the time
of the level assignment. My favorite example is language--inorganic as
puffs of wind or marks on a page, biological as vibrations of neurons,
eardrums and vocal chords, social as in common meanings, and
intellectual as in science, logic and mathematics.
I hope this responds to the points you raised. If I've missed something,
please let me know.
Best,
Platt
> Regarding your repeated statement that crime and terrorism are
> patterns of value on the biological level:
> If you leave Pirsig's quotes and his metaphors of "battle between
> society and biology" and "doctors killing germs" aside for a
> while, do you experience value in what Marco wrote 25/7 1:31
> +0200:
> "Assigning things to levels is not easy. Probably it's not even
> very correct."
> Could it be that our experiences (including the experiences we
> label as "crime" and "terrorism") can be seen to be part of
> different patterns of value on different levels simultaneously?
>
> You didn't reply to Rog's description in the "Karamazov"-thread
> of the quality in the terrorist attack on the WTC of 29/9
> 11:50 -0400. To me it demonstrated that this terrorism can even
> be seen as an element in a (low quality) intellectual pattern of
> values.
> The "martyr"-status suicidal terrorists strive for makes it (to
> me) clearly a part of a social pattern of values.
> And yes, rule-by-terror, trying to scare the USA army out of the
> Islamic heartland by attacking USA civilians at home, is also
> part of a biological pattern of values.
>
> To take a less controversial example: the throne that seems to
> have been discussed before in this mailing list is to me both an
> element in an inorganical pattern of values (a stable
> configuration of quantum effects presenting itself to us as
> "matter"), in an biological pattern of values (it saves kings
> the -biologically low quality- discomfort of sitting on the
> ground) and in a social pattern of values (it enhances the status
> of kings).
>
> With friendly greetings,
>
> Wim Nusselder
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:34 BST