Hi 3wd, Erin, Platt, Bodvar, Jonathan and all,
> 3WD
> <<<If in a commonsense way the moral systems of the MoQ are:
> inorganic ='s "laws of nature"
> organic ='s "laws of the jungle"
> social ='s "the law"
> intellectual = [Blank]
>
> Why did Pirsig not tie some name like these to this level? Or did he
> somewhere and I miss it? But if he didn't what are some of the
> possibilities? The best candidate?
> >>>
>
Why not "Human Rights" ?
According to Pirsig, Intellectual level took full prominence during the XXth century, when the individual rights started becoming effective. Intellectuals had actually designed previously human rights just to subtract their individual freedom (of knowledge, expression, movement, and so on...) from the rule of social laws. I guess they were tired to get the treatment of Socrates, Jesus, Galileo and so on.. - all killed or reduced to silence after legal trials.
Like to say: human rights are the set of laws the intellectual patterns have invented to keep at bay social patterns. And actually modern social laws should not be allowed to override human rights.
Ciao,
Marco
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 - 16:01:51 BST