thanks platt,
>Good point. It's easy to confuse means with meanings, the pump for the
>water. But money is a good gauge of a society's quality as it
>represents voluntary exchanges of goods and services (values)
>compared to alternatives means such as authoritarian edicts.
>
>But, getting back to the MOQ, Pirsig suggests that built into our
>primary awareness is an automatic index or gauge of Quality. A child's
>first cry and expression of "No" indicates the Quality meter is up an
>running, and it seems to last a lifetime. As Pirsig points out, the meter
>varies in its movements from person to person, depending on one's
>education and life experiences. Of course, the scientific worldview
>dismisses the existence of such a value meter because it doesn't
>register on an physical instrument and therefore, like a ghost, doesn't
>exist. Science must be "objective." Values, morals not allowed. Which
>makes it a disastrous intellectual pattern to dominate society. Not that
>Britney Spears and her fans would be any better. (-:
>
>Platt
Elliot:
Just because money is a good indicator right now under capitalism, lets not
think it is the only possible indicator or even the best possible indicator.
as Rog has told me before, lets let people decide what is Quality and not
subject them to objectified, quantified scales. there is corilation, right
now anyway, but dont tlet the MoQ go the way of James joyce and pragmatism
(in the eyes of others atleast) by using it as an excuse for making profit
because money is sometimes a good indicator of Quality.
Elliot
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
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 - 16:02:20 BST