>Dear Glove and other lovers of Quality:
>
>
>: Kevin:
>: >If one person can love, the whole world can love. If one person can live
>: >freely, the whole world can live freely. For what are we but a rather
>large
>: >group of persons.
>:
>: Glove:
>: Not according to the MOQ... the four levels are expressly about group
>: Dynamics versus individual Dynamics. One person can love, oh yes... but
>the
>: social level is not just a bunch of one persons... the social level is
>not a
>: living being, not a "thing" we can point at. Only a living being is
>capable
>: of love, and not the social level... this is all part of Pirsig's warning
>: about altruism. And this is also why the intellect level is of higher
>value
>: than is the social level, for the intellect level is individualistic.
>
>When one person loves another, they are engaged in a social arrangement. If
>the social level "is not a 'thing' we can point at," how can the social
>level ensure perpetual destruction? I think your obviating the issue:
>individuals create the social level, not the other way around. When one
>society wars with another, its still individuals who pull the triggers and
>push the buttons which slaughter each other. If even one individual can
>love another, then a loving social organization is possible everyone. If
>every individual vowed to end war, no abstract conception of society can
>kill.
Glove:
This is indeed a point of contention between your view and mine. Individuals
do not create the social level, or culture. There is Dynamic social force at
work that cannot be accounted for in the individuals who make up a culture.
What is good for the culture is not necessarily what is good for the
individual and the MOQ explains this very nicely.
>
>: Kevin:
>: And we can build a society founded on love and freedom if
>: >we only put the pessimism and greed and evil behind us. War, crime,
>: >poverty, and hate can be prevented - good deeds can be chosen over bad
>: >ones.
>:
>: Glove:
>:
>: All this can be accomplished individually but not socially... not in our
>: present day free-market society. The law of supply and demand works on
the
>: principle of not-enough-to-go-around. If such a thing as free energy were
>: possible, our free-market society would never allow it. Pirsig says
>: (paraphrased) that to think so is naïve and dangerous. The entrenched
>: power-brokers will never allow the end of war... war is profitable. It
>: always has been, and probably always will be.
>
>We can create a world without power-brokers. Where do they make their money
>except off individuals? Pirsig's Giant must enlist individuals to work for
>It. If both oppressor and oppressed wake up to their oppression, they can
>create a free society. To date, its only been accomplished on small scales
>- the early Christian Church, Gandhi's ashrams, the Spanish Anarchist, and
>so on. But their successes prove that success can multiply to encompass the
>world.
Glove:
I would put it to you that power brokers are an essential part of the
evolution of the social level at this time in our history. I would also say
that a "free society" is not free of power brokers, but rather Dynamically
free to develop in a constrained but not totally manipulated way.
>
>: People like you thought slavery inevitable - its now abolished in
>: >every major country in the world. People like you thought women would
>: >always remain oppressed - their struggle continues to win all over the
>: >world. People like you though feudalism would remain the perpetual
system
>: >of goverance or the Rome would never fall - things change and sometimes
>for
>: >the better. Perhaps it will take a spiritual/mystical revival on a
>: >world-wide scale, perhaps there will be a war to end all wars, perhaps
>: >decentralized socialist goverance will be copied in every nation, but
>there
>: >is a way to reach greater perfection. But your pessimism becomes
>: >self-fulfilling because it justifies not reaching for perfection. Your
>: >pessimism justifies allowing poor children to starve in the street, war
>to
>: >kill millions, and hate to spread in your midst, while you do nothing.
>This
>: >nihilistic attitude is evil and I cannot condone it in my midst. So in
>: >short, I staunchly disagree.
>
>: As Bill said, Jesus told us that there will be poor always, pathetically
>struggling, and he said
>: to look at the Good things we have.
>
>Point of fact: Bill didn't quote the actual Jesus but from the play Jesus
>Christ Superstar. A quite different level of credibility.
Glove:
Jesus spoke in parables, which I am sure you are aware. I don't think Bill
used an actual quote, nor did I, only paraphrases which do indeed sound much
like Jesus Christ, Superstar, though I didn't consciously intend it... when
confronted with excess in the face
of poverty, Jesus explained himself like this:
"For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them
good: but me ye
have not always." Mark 14:7 King James Edition
As I said, Jesus told us that the poor will always be with us, but those who
we love will not always be with us, so we must look at the good around us.
>
>: I would save all sentient beings, if only I could. Please remember that
to
>: strive for perfection will always result in the Shadow, the Dark Side,
>: whatever one cares to call it. The Metaphysics of Quality gives us
>: guidelines for building a better tomorrow, this I will agree with. But it
>: comes only with a certain amount of ruthlessness.
>(...)
>: I again remind you that I am not a pessimist, nor am I a realist. I
simply
>: see how things are, and there is nothing I can do to save the world until
>I
>: am able to save myself. And that is the very same boat everyone is in.
>: Society is not going to save us... it may make survival easier for us
>: individually, but that always comes with a price... the loss of
individual
>: liberties. Only the intellect can find a way to oppose the social level,
>for
>: the biological level has already been dominated by society. And the
>: intellect does not reside in the group, only in the individual.
>
>Intellect only flourishes with a rational society. As Pirsig writes:
>
>"'What is the purpose of all this intellectual knowledge?' the Metaphysics
>of Quality answers, 'The fundamental purpose of knowledhe is to Dynamically
>improve and perserve society.'
>
>Although I admit truth is an end in itself, the original purpose of it
>remains, to benefit society. The domination of intellectual values only
>means that the society we create should be founded on truth, not that we
>should reject society. Galileo could have found the truth and turned
>taciturn. Thank Quality, he didn't because he knew that his knowledge could
>benefit society as a whole. He knew he could help society's intellect.
>Isn't that the purpose of Lila Squad? Why join a group if a hermit's genius
>is all we can hope for?
Glove:
I suppose we all have our reasons for joining this discussion group. To be
quite honest though, I cannot see where the purpose of the discussion group
is to help society's intellect, or that society has an intellect. I do
believe this is a danger of thinking of society in an individualistically
based way.
>
>I got very, very angry upon reading your post because it is an afront to
>everything I stand for and everything I think the Metaphysics of Quality
>proposes. We can't resign ourselves to shrug our shoulders at the
>atrocities in the world; we must act to end them, to further Quality. If
>the book Lila is an inquiry into morals, it leaves us with a moral
>imperative for all human aciton - perserve society, increase intellect, and
>strive for Dynamic Quality. Poverty, war, and other evils threaten to
>immorally destroy society, intellect, and prevent us from achieving Dynamic
>Quality. We should act to end them, even if we can't.
Glove:
If you truly believe that we must act to end the atrocities of the world,
then I would put it to you that your time would be better spent on other
pursuits than simply writing about ending them. I myself have not the
slightest clue where to start at putting an end to all the terrible things
that happen in the world, except thru my own right actions and practice.
Poverty and war are all part of the Dynamic evolution of the human race.
This doesn't mean they are good in the sense we normally think of good as...
they are Dynamic. Seeing this entails not getting angry at what we discover,
not simply accepting it either, but rather recognizing the true nature of
the beast and dealing with "it" as best we can.
>
>But what evidence have you presented that we can't? It's a claim without a
>warrant. Because we had poverty in this past doesn't mean it can't be
>ended. Empirically, past liberations means that future liberations are
>achievable. If physical slavery isn't inevitable, why is the economic
>slavery called poverty? If peace has been achieved before, why can't peace
>happen in the future? The historical inevitability you pontificate is
>unwarranted and, as I already said, self-fulfilling - when you say the
>grapes are sour or out-of-reach, we don't jump for them or taste them.
Glove:
Well, as I have said in previous posts, the quest for a perfect society will
only result in a stasis and the destruction of that society. That is part of
the lesson the MOQ teaches us and it is born out historically as well. It
was not my intention to anger anyone with my words, but that too is
inevitable I suppose.
>
>Society can save us if we save ourselves through it. When independent and
>rational individuals freely choose to group together interdependently, they
>can create a society which ensures not merely survival, but goodness. This
>synergistic process never enslaves individuals, it only empowers us. We
>find greater meaning and happiness when we help one another and when we
>work together toward betterness. You wrote: "[T]here is nothing I can do to
>save the world until I am able to save myself. And that is the very same
>boat everyone is in." If we're all in the same boat, maybe we can help each
>other save each other. Although cliche, you can make a difference. History
>is full of individuals who acted boldly and advanced us all toward greater
>Quality. And we write the history of the future.
Glove:
Each of my actions have untold consequences not only on the present, but the
past and future as well. Our culture is relativistic and while my actions
occur within the context of the culture I inhabit, those actions are
themselves Quality and not dependent upon relativistic betterment of what I
perceive around me. Quality shines brightly and needs no cultural relativism
to light the way.
best wishes,
glove
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:04 BST