From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Thu Jul 14 2005 - 16:36:03 BST
Ed:
>Pirsig notes that this evolutionary morality contains a warning. I
> took this warning to suggest that at the interfaces of the four levels,
> Inorganic-Biological-Societal-Idea, the higher level can threaten itself
> when it "weakens and destroys the health" of the next-lower level. The Idea
> level can pursue dynamic quality to its heart's content, but when in this
> pursuit it "weakens and destroys the health" of the Societal level--it in
> turn threatens itself for it will have a weaker base upon which to stand.
> We may differ in opinion as to whether "the dynamic pursuit of this mogul
> and those he represents is simply an intellectual level argument against
> society that has run amok." I see this as holding well to MSH's original
> concern about "the influence of wealth on social policy." But before we
> argue that further, I wonder if you see the MOQ warning in the same way
> that I do.
Yes. As Pirsig describes in detail in Chapter 24, SOM intellect doesn't
recognize the role of society in taming biological forces and "In the
battle of society against biology, the new twentieth-century intellectuals
have take biology's side. . . . The result has been a drop in both social
and intellectual quality." (Lila, 24)
Along these lines I came across two articles in the past few days that
describe the current malaise in Europe whose causes are many but among
them I believe to be the moral vacuum created by SOM that Pirsig
describes. Among Europe's current problems:
. 20 million unemployed
. productivity rates falling behind those of the U.S.
. more science graduates being produced in India than in Europe
. of top 20 universities in the world today, only two in Europe
. entrepreneurial activity twice as low as in the U.S
. low birthrates, well below replacement rate of 2.1 children
. almost one-third of the population 65 and older by 2050
. problems with Muslim immigrants
. resistance to change of social welfare benefits
This is not to cast aspersions on our European friends or to say that the
U.S. is without it's own problems. But it may be that today we're
witnessing the gradual decline of a great civilization because too many
people are benefiting from the status quo to be motivated to change it,
even though according to many observers, the status quo isn't sustainable.
Europe today reminds me of this poignant passage from Lila:
"It was like watching the spider waiting while the wasp gets ready to
attack it. The spider can leave any time to save its life but it doesn't
do so. It just waits there, paralyzed by some internal pattern of
responses that make it unable to recognize its own danger. The wasp plants
its eggs in the spiders body and the spider lives on while the wasp larvae
slowly eat it and destroy it." (Lila, 24)
Ed:
> A further example of this MOQ warning, apt for the Biological-Societal
> interface, is found in the following passage from State of the World 1987.
> Although the emphasis is on the Bio-Social interface, it traverses all four
> of the evolutionary levels:
Many civilizations like Mesopotamia have come and gone over the millennia
for any number of reasons. No doubt lack of farming knowledge caused some
to decline. Our biggest immediate concern--beyond any gradual decline
which may be taking place -- is WMD in the hands of biological terrorists
who take pleasure in blowing people up. The MOQ solution: supply the
military and police with every means available to find, disarm and punish
them.
Ed:
> My primary intent here was not to contend that somehow our society needs
> improvement, although I can see how you would construe this as being
> implied. On this implication I noted that the two quotes "hedge against
> the static codes of morality in which our society in now embedded." I
> was bringing to the fore the greater context that must be addressed, in
> my opinion, in order to assist society in its evolution. The Pirsig
> quote, as well as the Campbell quote, bring us back to a location that
> is before the duality began. From this place there is more dyamic
> freedom. As humans we must traverse into duality, but in this duality an
> unrelenting static hold can sometimes mitigate this freedom.
I don't think going back to a location before duality began is possible.
Reason, after all, is based on dualities. Instead I think we need to rely
on SOM to reveal a moral system built into the structure of the cosmos
that we had better understand and attend to or suffer the consequences.
Such a system if, of course, the MOQ. The MOQ test of truth -- logical
consistency, agreement with experience, and economy of explanation -- are
the same tests SOM uses but with blinders firmly in place to prevent any
seeing of values. Removing those blinders is our mutual task.
What do you think?
Platt
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 : Thu Jul 14 2005 - 23:47:22 BST