From: Matt the Enraged Endorphin (mpkundert@students.wisc.edu)
Date: Sat Jan 04 2003 - 01:24:52 GMT
Platt,
>DMB wrote:
>As I understand it, Pirsig does say that the more liberal ideologies, that
>one's that would tend to concern themselves with feed and educate the
>poor, are more moral than the one's that don't.
>
>Matt wrote:
>I agree that Pirsig says liberal ideologies are more moral than others.
>
>Would either of you gentlemen care to back up your assertion with
>evidence? I've looked in Lila and can find none. Rather, Pirsig seems to
>contradict your assertion when he says:
>
>"To put philosophy in the service of any social organization or any
>dogma is immoral." (29)
Two points:
I took my agreement to mean two things:
DMB said: "that one's that would tend to concern themselves with feed and
educate the poor, are more moral than the one's that don't."
As a starter, Pirsig says, "Cultures can be graded and judged morally
according to their contribution to the evolution of life." (Ch 24, end)
I would think that feeding the poor (social control over biological) and
educating them (intellectual control over social) would be a Quality thing
to try and do. If its not, then I hesitate to ask what Quality stands for.
And two, DMB said: "the more liberal ideologies ... are more moral than the
one's that don't."
I take liberal to mean two things: Shklar's definition of liberal, "Cruelty
is the worst thing one can do," and classical liberalism which says that we
should stay as much as possible out of each other's private business. I
think the two are completely compatible, and its partly why, I think,
Pirsig endorses capitalism as he does. More private free time equals more
chances to be Dynamic.
That's why I agreed. However, I don't speak for DMB on this issue, as most
of the discussions about Pirsig's political position spiral out of control
quite quickly, and I don't want to become wrapped up in that. I don't
think what I'm saying is controversial at all.
This is all besides the fact that I don't think what you quoted ("To put
philosophy in the service of any social organization or any dogma is
immoral.") has anything to do with what DMB asserted. If I interpret this
as you have, Pirsig's talking about philosophy and ideologies. I suspect
that Pirsig would agree that there are idealogies that are more moral than
others. I get that from the quote I used above. What your quote disbars
is using a government institution to promote, say, the MoQ. We have a
moral right to believe and discuss any philosophy we want. That's also
commensurate with my interpretation of liberalism from above.
Matt
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 2.1.5 : Sat Jan 04 2003 - 01:19:17 GMT