Hello Davids (B & T) and all,
Me> > If you look back over the A-bomb exchange ...
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.
David, I'm disappointed that you have so little respect for a discussion
that took place only a few weeks ago. The archives are full of some
really great threads, but we tend to ignore it and instead keep going
round in circles. I know that I myself am rather lazy about referencing
back to old posts, and that's nothing to be proud about.
Me:
> > 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.
>
David Thomas
> Bo recently pointed out that we need to keep in
> mind that higher levels have
> means of accessing the lower ones.
[David continues with Pirsig quotes about the dependence of each level
on the levels below]
So now I have to take on both Davids ...
I accept some of the points, but have great difficulty with David B.'s
"comparisons BETWEEN the levels".
The example fidelity vs. sexual pleasure illustrates the point nicely.
Fidelity isn't in opposition to sexual pleasure - one can even argue the
contrary. However, Fidelity "values" many other things besides. Fidelity
is BIGGER that sex, but IMHO fidelity that values sexual pleasure is
better that fidelity that denies it.
Me
> > 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.
Sorry you found that confusing. My mixing up ideas and software was an
example of what you are doing with the levels. Evolution involves
competition WITHIN the levels. The "better" pattern is the one that
comes to dominate = survival of the fittest if you like. That
competition operates on the level of individual vs. individual and
society vs. society, but not society vs. the individual (which is always
indirect).
David B:
> yes, a "reasoned comparison" of just about ANYTHING
> can be considered intellectual.
AGREED!!!
> 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.
The intellectual principle supports one social level institution over
another. Intellect is the arbitrator, not a player.
David Buchanan:
> Democracy is a principle. [snip]
David is confusing ends and means.
Democracy is a METHOD. It's a means to achieve other values like peace
and security. That's why it's used selectively to further those aims and
otherwise rejected (like in my domestic arrangement which includes 4
junior citizens who are denied full democratic rights).
David B.
> The opinions of voters are not [a principle].
> 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.)
The choices of the voters are governed by their own principles or lack
of them.
That's what makes the difference between "mob rule" and justice. This is
why I have repeatedly stressed the moral sense of the individual (if
you care to look back over dozens of "ancient conversations";-)
Is anyone still with me? I thought not.
Good night Jonathan, sleep well.
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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:13 BST