In a message dated 98-10-21 12:06:10 EDT, kilian wrote:
<< Many references have been made to the brujo in conjunction with this
line of thinking, but the brujo never campaigned for the acceptance of
his way of life. He never tried to convince the old priests of anythign
or show them where they went wrong, he just lived. He lived his life in
as much accordance with Quality as he could, and changes followed as a
result. Why this talk of evangelism? The brujo example, in particular,
shows marked disregard for what others think in the name of living
towards one's personal choices of Quality. The opinions of others are of
little importance. IMO this is the lesson should be taken from the
story of the brujo, not that one should pay homage to society, or try to
sway public opinion in your favor.
Kilian >>
I agree that that is one lesson you can take from the brujo story. But you
leave a lot out. Why did he chose such a respected position in his culture
and why did he become a leader of his culture if he didn't regard the
importance of his society? The brujo had to know what he was doing when he
sent notice to the local 'sheriff'. The people chose him because they
recognized his quailty. What if they didn't? If he died would he still have
Dynamic Quality (of course he wouldn't sorry about being so facetious)?
If anything the story illustrates the need for society to allow the diversity
of thought that could later preserve the society. And orignially it was an
attack on the 'objective' logic of anthropology.
On the other hand, im not into evanglism, but when an issue affects me I want
my opinion known. If you don't take a stand (or cast a vote) your opinion
often doesn't count. You will have no value to the debate (hahaha).
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:36 BST