Hiya john:
You said:
> But a Nazi who believes in Nazism for its
> undoubted eugenic superiority over other ideologies is still a Nazi. The
> idea that we all know quality when we meet it is the root of Pirsig's
> error. The intellect can support awful outcomes, just as can the social
> level values.
Elliot:
I believe Pirsig's morality is sufficent. I do no think that he claims as
you do that any action can be justified under the guise of quality. The
"clear" perception of quality would lead an individual to realize that
killing is of a very low quality. A Nazi who believes that nazism is an
individualy liberating philosophy is obviously dilusional, because nazism
was rebellion against the intellectual level in favor of the social.
So where does "clear" perception of quality come from? Experience,
mysticism, daily contact with dynamic quality on a personal level. And
although Pirsig doesnt state this explicitly, it is implied in his ideas.
To the extent that someone's perception is not clear is the extent to which
they are caught up in static patterns (intellectually or ever worse,
social), such as nazism. There for what the MoQ needs is not a complex
static pattern of morality (although i havent read any of Wilber), but a
philosophy that stresses the pursuit of Dynamic Quality, which is exactly
what Pirsig does.
Platt stated it nicely:
> "The world is full of suffering. I can make an effort here, patch up
> something there, but the impact is minimal. The mystic alternative seems
> selfish at first. Attend to my own salvation. Yet without this I labour in
> vain, since my action flows from judgment that is bound up with my egoic
> development, and ultimately flows from childhood trauma and my bondage to
> patterns established then. Only liberation within can free me to act
> morally in the world."
Elliot:
Adhering to a complex static pattern of morality is destined for failure.
Even pirsig's evolutionary morality is only a guide for those who cannot
percieve clearly yet, but if it pursuades people to follow it rather than
DQ, than it is a failure. A more complicated system may often lead to more
actions that happen to be moral, but if the individual acts that way
because he read so and not because he feels it deep down inside (from
experience with DQ), then his actions are in vain.
You may say, yea elliot, that sounds great, but we'll never get enough
people to do it your way. But i respond, yes, but we'll never get enough
people to do it Wilber's way either, so if we're striving for the
impossible, let's chose the greatest of the two. And perhaps if enough
people acted moraly because they felt it, people would see its value and
begin their own journeys. If enough people push Wilber's philosophy, the
best possible result is confusion and misinterpretation. What morally
upright philosophies did the Nazis use to justify their actions? some of
the same Pirsig identifies as being right on with the MoQ.
Elliot
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 - 16:02:14 BST