Wim wrote:
We already found out that we disagree on the interpretation of the 'social'
and 'intellectual' levels. I associate all ideological conflict (and the
ideas that conflict) primarily with the intellectual level, as they are
primarily conscious value conflicts.
Quoting Pirsig (from a note on page 38 of 'Lila's child') a bit off context
these are 'intellectual conflicts in which one side clings to an
intellectual justification of existing social patterns and the other side
intellectually opposes the existing social patterns.'
DMB says:
Let me guess at the context. I'd guess that Pirsig is refering to a battle
between a Victorian, reactionary or conservative and a intellectual of the
SOM variety. I hope you saw my very recent reply to 3WD about the Israeli
man who claimed a birth-right. There was a man who is making "an
intellectual justification for existing social patterns". This sort of thing
happens all the time. It results in confusion about the difference between
social and intellecutal values. Its ususally caused by the same confusion
too. In any case, the quote also shows that social level values are asserted
in political debate. I think it shows that social level ideologies are
certainly out there, even if they are all dressed up in intellectual
justifications. The views and values can be expressed in language that might
seem like it has to be intellectual. This is one of the best reasons to
believe that the social level is not unconscious. It seems to be less
conscious is some real interesting ways, but that is not the same as
unconscious. Notice how the extreme right-wing ideologies tend to emphasize
MY culture, MY religion or MY race. It seems to exhibit an inability to see
beyond one's own. Its all about me and mine. There is a narrowness of vision
that goes with social level ideologies that makes it permissable to exclude
others, to push them aside, or even to exterminate them. "The only good
Indian is a dead Indian". ETC.
Wim said:
I do agree however with you when you continue with:
'I think what the MOQ says about this specific problem is that a solution on
the social level is quite impossible. It can only be solved at the
intellectual level. Two cultures trying to occupy the same space at the
space time is unworkable without tons of help from the intellectual level.'
DMB says:
Cool. If I may go further... A pluralistic society is possible elsewhere,
but apparently not in Israel. To the extent that the opposing ideologies are
based in the social level, seperate states are the only solution. And that
solution can only be derived on a level that can include and transcend the
social values on BOTH sides. This is what the intellectual level values can
do. They don't merely embrace or reject either set of social level values,
intellectual level values can see them both and sort out the differences.
This case is especially difficult because there are so many who wish to
assert the kind of false birth right that 3WD described. The Prime Minister
himself believes that the land is god given. And there are parties to the
right of him in Israel! The problem with the USA stepping in to sort it out
right now is that the administration is beholden to and sympathetic with the
social level ideologies in his own party. America's religious right believes
it has to support Isreal unconditionally to ensure the proper circumstances
exist for Christ's second coming. I kid you not. How scary is that?
With griendly freetings,
DMB
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 - 16:02:16 BST