JM and all: Just a few thoghts in respnse...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Marder [SMTP:marder@agri.huji.ac.il]
> Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 6:34 AM
> To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> Subject: Re: MD SPILLOVER
>
>
> If you look back over the A-bomb
> exchange, I accused David B. of conveniently condemning as "social
> level"
> any opinion he disagreed with. I believe that this stems from a
> confusion
> between:
> 1. The scale of quality
> vs.
> 2. The hierarchical layering of the levels
>
[David Buchanan] Well, OK. But its sort of odd to reference
such an ancient conversation, especially since I've posted so much on
the topic recently.
> Within each level, you can make quality decisions, but you can't
> make quality comparisons BETWEEN levels. That contradicts their
> independent
> nature.
>
[David Buchanan] The moral codes are precisely aimed at
comparisons BETWEEN the levels. That's what makes fidelity more moral
than sexual pleasure, etc. Pirsig's codes are the compass that allow us
to navigate thru moral questions and quality comparisons.
> It's like saying that my old Sinclair home computer is BETTER than a
> brand-new souped up computer workstation, because the old computer
> contains an electronic version of my intellectually brilliant
> treatise,
> while the new computer only contains some intellectually bankrupt
> preloaded
> software. One has to specifiy at what basis the comparison is being
> made.
>
[David Buchanan] The analogy is confusing. You're mixing
machines up with ideas and software. But if I understand what you're
getting at, the basis of comparison in the MOQ is one of evolution.
Fidelity is more moral than nookie simplly because social values are
more evolved than biological values. For the same reason, intellectual
values are more moral than social values, which is Pirsig's 4th moral
code.
> I previously wrote that one can consider each level as MEDIATING or
> resolving conflicts at the lower level. The social vs. intellectual
> relationship could be illustrated in the following example:
> Monogamy and Polygamy are two conflicting social patterns.
> A reasoned comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of each, and
> a
> subsequent conclusion of which was "better" could be considered an
> intellectual pattern.
>
[David Buchanan] Both forms of marriage are social level
institutions and, yes, a "reasoned comparison" of just about ANYTHING
can be considered intellectual. The conflicts really only arise if and
when an intellectual principle contradicts the morality of a person's
participation in some particular social level instituion. I sure
wouldn't try to make a case against marriage in our culture and don't
see how it violates any higher values, but then again ploygamy seems to
have very little respect for the rights or the humanity of the 15th
wife. He gets 15 wives and she gets one fifteeth of one husband? It
doesn't even seem right or fair on a the social level. But I digress....
> Ironically, some of Pirsig's examples of intellectual patterns fall
> short of
> the mark.
> e.g. In democracy, an election isn't determined by a reasoned
> intellectual
> process, but by decisions made on whatever basis the individual
> chooses
> (e.g. charisma, sex-appeal, good-looks, etc.). I think one can come up
> with
> some very good intellectual arguments AGAINST democratic elections.
> Let me add, for the record, I personally support democratic elections.
> My
> reasons for doing so may indeed be "intellectual" patterns, but I
> consider
> the elections themselves as a *social* pattern.
>
[David Buchanan] Democracy is a principle. The opinions of
voters are not. The principles of Democratic government fully recognizes
the difference between mob rule and the rule of law and genuine consent
of the governed. But I'd agree that voting on the basis of looks is not
just stupid, its immoral. (Unless its a beauty contest.)
Congratulations for having the moral courage to stand up for
Democracy !!!
> Jonathan
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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
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 - 16:03:13 BST