From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sat Jan 18 2003 - 13:36:46 GMT
Hi Mari:
> Mari asks:
> Platt, do you think that this Pirsig quote:
>
> "To put philosophy in the service of any social organization or any
> dogma is immoral. It's a lower form of evolution trying to devour a higher
> one." (29)
>
> makes sense? Will you tell me your take on it? How does that
> quote apply to a public/private split?
In the MoQ, the intellectual level (philosophy) is morally superior to the
social level (static social organizations). "Dogma" is a particularly rigid
form of static social patterns. I view the public/private split to be similar
to Pirsig's social/intellectual split.
>Are there any example that you can
> think of where something was not only proposed but enacted for the "public
> good" and as intentioned, served that very good and perhaps served the
> "public good" better than intended?
Mass innoculations against smallpox and infantile paralysis served the
public well.
>There is no doubt that society has made
> it's blunders. i think it is highly unlikey that individuals left to ther
> own devices and will would lead to a better place than we are now. As
> screwed up as the world seems to be, having a "free for all" does not
> immediately seem to have much merit. i know you didn't say that you wanted
> a free for all nor did you say that individual rule is what you are
> professing. i will admit to "projecting" and a created my own example of
> how self serving our philosophys and language can get when ego wants to run
> the show. Sorry for the set up! My Ego knows how to spin the I, ME, My
> song..... thought i would practice it a little with you. :-)
I agree that individual free-for-all would be disastrous. As Pirsig says,
each level supports the next highest. Intellect cannot survive without the
social level to maintain order, keep biological forces under control and
provide for the common defense. The question has always been how
much and what kind of the social order is required to encourage
individual responses to DQ in order that evolution towards betterment
can flourish?
The central issue between conservatives and liberals was succinctly put
by Kevin. "Individuals should push society towards betterment. To
reverse those roles creates enormous opportunities for tyranny." Pirsig
implies the same in the quote above.
Platt
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 18 2003 - 13:41:32 GMT