Hi Squonk:
> Intellectual values are less particular and more universal?
> That is to say they have an implicit order that transcends individual
> identity. If DQ is undifferentiated, and the telos of evolution is towards
> the undifferentiated, then any insistence upon identity is a move away from
> that which is best? The 'self' is a narrative; a life history, a string of
> perceptions. The real self could better be identified with that aspect of
> us that is more universal, undifferentiated and prior to conceptualised,
> discursive interpretations of something static and individual?
If you are saying there is something greater than you and I, I agree. If
you say it is "society," then I disagree. Human history is the story of
degenerate individuals shaking off totalitarian shackles and
groupthink. The story in Chap. 9 of LILA of the brujo and the Zuni tribe
illustrates my point.
> Are you suggesting censorship? There are already laws against fraud.
>
> I should like an emphasis on social and intellectual values and less
> emphasis on how important celebrities are.
Pirsig makes the point that celebrity helps hold societies together.
Personally, I find the shift in celebrity since 9/11 from the likes of Britney
Spears to policemen, firemen and soldiers to be healthy for American
society.
> If you ask me, we already have too many laws protecting our "colony."
> Colonies don't respond to DQ; only individuals do.
>
> All patterns are in an evolutionary relationship with DQ - even colonies.
> The level of sophistication of our colony is living proof of this; and is
> an argument against individuality.
Colonies only respond to DQ as the result of action on the part of
individuals. Pirsig writes: "A tribe can only change its values person by
person and someone has to be first." (Chap. 9)
> If one values the carrot dangled in front of one's nose, then one is going
> may be in danger of being manipulated? :)
Don't you think the lesser danger is being manipulated by a carrot than
a gun? I'll take persuasion over force any day.
> This thread sakes a question, and my answer would be to suggest that
> globalization is destroying diversity on the ecological, social, and if we
> are not careful, intellectual level through religious fundamentalism be
> that either Islamic or Christian right wing fundamentalism of the
> particularly unpleasant variety found in the USA.
Would you care to define "globalization?"
> I have had the feeling before today that you are an American and a proud
> one at that? I do not wish to be provocative; i like individual Americans
> ironicaly. Its the flag waving social bit i have a problem with.
Yes, proud to be American, and to the wave the flag as a symbol of
individual freedom to invest my time and money as I wish, keep what I
earn, travel as I please, speak without fear, and vote for those who
govern. Without intending to be provocative, do you have any problem
with that?
> P.S. logic? 5th level? Anything to say?
Logic is a flexible intellectual level pattern that can be used to support
any point of view depending on initial premises. It has nothing to do
with any potential 5th level that I can imagine. May I assume you have
something else in mind?
Platt
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 - 16:01:58 BST