From: ian glendinning (psybertron@gmail.com)
Date: Sat May 21 2005 - 05:30:13 BST
Interesting exchange ... and Pirsig quote from Ant
Not sure I understand your last phrase Michael - "MoQ disqualifiesfrom pragmatism" ? Are you saying MoQ is "qualified pragmatism" - I'mhoping - as opposded to "not" pragamtism ?
As in all things moderation of course - leadership is not wholly bad -pragmatically. The trick is to notice when you're being led, andremember you have only "suspended" some of your freedoms in order tobe led, and not let it become blind (or conveniently ignorant) faith.George's alternative of total anarchy would be very inefficient - iffun for a while. (Actually collaborative leadership - the f-word -federalism - is the right general idea. Convenient ignorance -abrogation - is the evil.)
Ian
On 5/21/05, Johannes Volmert <jvolmert@student.uni-kassel.de> wrote:> > > Ant McWatt wrote:> &> wrote:> > > Ant McWatt wrote:> > > Michael Hamilton stated May 19th 2005:> >> > "The MOQ says that the good to which truth is subordinate is> > intellectual and Dynamic usefulness, not social usefulness."> >> > I need to illustrate this. Nazi ideology placed the Volksgemeinschaft> > ("people's community", i.e. social value) as the highest moral> > objective. Therefore, the practicality to which they subordinated> > truth was pure social value. Hence, their discouragement of> > intellectual development, and instead their indoctrination of children> > with the "correct" (i.e. socially conformist) beliefs. This is a clear> > example of intellectual value (truth) being shackled to social value.> > It is this kind of practicality that the social/intellectual division> > of the MOQ disqualifies from pragmatism.> >> > Ant McWatt comments:> >> > Michael,> >> > Thank you for your recent excellent posts on George Galloway, "Dynamic> > usefulness" and the di
stinction between intellectual and social> > practicality. Your illustration of the latter reminded of Pirsig's> > view on leadership which I've been looking for an excuse to post for> > some time:> >> > "X sounds like a very decent person but his talk about leadership> > gives me a creepy Wagnerian feeling. In Minnesota, where I come from…> > the population is heavily Germanic in ethnic descent. (I'm one of> > them.) I heard a lot of that word in grade school before World War II> > where they were always talking about training us to be leaders. Then> > the German word for leader, 'führer,' dominated the scene and seemed> > to put the whole idea of leadership out of favor, and I was glad to> > see it go. Talk about leadership places social patterns as the thing> > to think about rather than the quality and ideas that the people> > should follow whether there are any 'leaders' or not. Saddam Hussein> > has been a leader in every sense of the word. Albert Einstein has> > acted as though he never heard o!
f the wo
rd."> >> > (Robert Pirsig to Anthony McWatt, October 24th 2003)> >> > Ant McWatt comments:> >> > Of course, it was ideas such as leadership in Nazi Germany which> > promoted social patterns (such as conformity to what a leadership> > might recommend). This, in turn, encouraged the silencing of> > intellectual dissent (by the ethnic Germans) and therefore facilitated> > the persecution of the Jews.> >> > I notice that in some recent MOQ Discuss posts, that Ham has stated> > (incorrectly) that SOM is the only way to metaphysically divide> > reality (modernist view) and that Matt K (incorrectly) thinks the> > intellect-social division is not particularly useful (post-modernist> > view). I think the MOQ analysis of Nazi Germany highlights the value> > of recognising that the social level (such as celebrity) is distinct> > and secondary to intellectual values (such as truth and justice) and,> > therefore, (via emphasising this difference) helps us (i.e. the human> > race) in not repeating the same error twice.> >
> > Best wishes,> >> > Anthony> >> > Hi All,> > as a German and as one being very much troubled by the named history of> my country (though born many, many years after the war) , I want to> support Ant's point of view, especially the last paragraph. The said> part of Lila has been always the most striking to me (except parts of> the description of the int. level). I have never before and after that> come over another similar convincing Analysis of the historical events> and conflicting forces in those times. I never came closer to grasp> these monstrosities.> > Greetings, Johannes> > > > 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 instr> > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html> >
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 : Sat May 21 2005 - 05:35:03 BST