RE: MD Access to Quality

From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sun May 08 2005 - 00:27:38 BST

  • Next message: Mark Steven Heyman: "Re: MD the ideology of capitalism"

    Matt, Mark, Sam and all MOQers:

    Matt said to Mark:
    If there's a distinction in the area that might be of use, people might
    first reach for the prudence/principle distinction. Lower level people act
    out of their own prudent self-interest, but higher level people act out of
    universal principles. But this distinction should look a lot like the
    social/intellectual distinction, and we should stay away from it.

    dmb says:
    The reasons why we should stay away from it made little sense to me, but
    let's just say you have SOME respect for the prudence/principle, at least
    sometimes. I hope it might be enough to get started. See, what if we think
    about the classic example in terms of that principle? In LILA Hitler is
    depicted as the ultimate anti-intellectual and glorifier of social level
    values. Its hardly different from saying he was the ultimate anti-democratic
    human rights abuser and glorifier of Germany's narrow self-interests at the
    expense of those principles. Same idea. I know you can see that.

    But in case you missed it, the usefulness of Pirsig's distinction is its
    ability to identify the underlying forces behind all the various reactionary
    movements of the 20th century. In this way, a whole series of seemingly
    unrelated movements in various cultures can be seen as part of a larger
    pattern. In short, they are reactions to the rise of Modernity. The
    distinction allows us to see that we are dealing with a multi-headed
    shape-shifter. We can see, to use the classic examples again, that Hitler
    and Mussolini both rejected Modernity in favor of trying to re-capture the
    heroic Aryan warriors and Roman soldiers of the "glorious" past. And we can
    recognize this beast wherever it rears one of its reactionary heads...

    Sam Norton quoted Alasdair MacIntyre, a philosopher/theologian he greatly
    admires:

    "There is thus the sharpest of contrasts between the emotivist self of
    modernity and the self of the heroic age. The self of the heroic age lacks
    precisely that characteristic which we have already seen that some modern
    moral philosophers take to be an essential characteristic of human
    self-hood; the capacity to detach oneself from any particular standpoint or
    point of view, to step backwards, as it were, and view and judge that
    standpoint or point of view from the outside. In heroic society there is no
    'outside' except that of the stranger. A man who tried to withdraw himself
    from his given position in heroic society would be engaged in the enterprise

    of trying to make himself disappear. Identity in heroic society involves
    particularity and accountability.... what we have to learn from heroic
    societies is twofold; first that all morality is always to some degree tied
    to the socially local and particular and that the aspirations of the
    morality of modernity to a universality freed from all particularity is an
    illusion; and secondly that there is no way to possess the virtues except as

    part of a tradition in which we inherit them and our understanding of them
    from a series of predecessors in which series heroic societies hold first
    place. If this is so, the contrast between freedom of choice of values of
    which modernity prides itself and the absence of such choice in heroic
    cultures would from the standpoint of a tradition ultimately rooted in
    heroic societies appear more like the freedom of ghosts - of those whose
    human substance approached vanishing point - than of men." (AV pp 126-127)

    dmb concludes:
    Notice how freedom is here depicted as a kind of horror, as a kind of self
    annihilation so that there is only death outside of the social structure.
    The Heroic age sounds like hell to me. I'm truly saddened by your admiration
    of this sentiment, Sam. Its no wonder we don't agree about much. Yikes!

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    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 : Sun May 08 2005 - 00:35:18 BST