Re: MD Cooperation, Profit and Some Thoughts

From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sun Oct 23 2005 - 11:52:37 BST

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "Re: MD bullshit"

    > [Platt on being a relativist]
    > Pretty much so as regards products and services. As for morality, no.
    >
    > [Arlo]
    > Why is morality not an aspect of products and services?

    There's not a great moral issue on whether to buy Aquafresh or Crest
    toothpaste.
     
    > [Platt on the crisis described in ZMM]
    > That's surface stuff. For the current culture crises caused by today's
    > intellectuals, read Chapter 24 of Lila.
    >
    > [Arlo]
    > A chapter versus an entire book. Hmm. But I don't disagree. Let me ask you
    > this. If the crisis of Lila is the past 100 years of ammorality brought on
    > by a SOM incapable of dealing with morals, why is production and
    > consumption during this same period "immune" to this amorality?

    So long as free choice remains in the marketplace, it tends to be self-
    correcting from a moral standpoint. It's intellect's interference in the
    marketplace (social level pattern) that's the problem with regulation
    piled on regulation so that it's a wonder anything gets produced. Witness
    today the shortage of oil refineries due to such intellectual
    interference.

    > That is, the "junk" of production and consumption is produced by the
    > Intellectual amorality brought forth by the SOM. Has the "business world"
    > in your opinion been unaffected, or is immune, to this? Pirsig didn't think
    > so, and devoted an entire book to examining the fallout (in produciton and
    > consumption) of the post-Industrial revolution (1900-present) amorality in
    > production and consumption.

    I didn't get the impression from ZMM that the whole book was about poor
    products and services. My impression was it was about reality seen through
    a classic or romantic lens..

    > [Platt]
    > As for taxes, we agree. As for back to the 1890, yes, people were more free
    > from government interference then.
    >
    > [Arlo]
    > And look at what world most people lived in. Hardly one I'd want to go back
    > to. "Free from government interference", maybe, but enslaved by necessity
    > and servitude.

    Yes. Thanks to capitalism, technology and the free market, living
    conditions for most people are much better today.

    > [Arlo]
    > Then who declared them "relative"? What about them makes them so? And other
    > things "not"? And you avoided my question, are drug lords "enriching the
    > culture" by virtue of their desired product and amount of sales? Is that a
    > relative answer too?
    >
    > [Platt]
    > Don't you think drugs should be legalized? I mean, don't we need more
    > people hallucinating so they too can create a new metaphysics like Pirsig?
    >
    > [Arlo]
    > We certainly could use more people having illuminating experiences like
    > Pirsig did with the peyote, that led to the MOQ. But you avoided the
    > question. Are drug lords enriching the culture? Is "enrichment" relative,
    > like you seem to indicate?

    Well, I guess to some they are. To me, no.

    > [Platt]
    > I know. You want to change human nature. Lotsa luck. I prefer to work with
    > it, like the natural human desire to be free. .
    >
    > [Arlo]
    > So, Pirsig defied human nature with his decision to author and publish
    > outside of money and fame profit?
    >
    > Let me ask you straight-out, since you've avoid the question every other
    > way. Was whatever motivated Pirsig unnatural or natural?

    Unnatural in the sense that most people work to make money. I presume
    Pirsig also needs money. I presume you do, too. Are you suggesting there's
    something immoral about that?

     [Platt]
    > I don't see that Pirsig was out to "fix" the free market. He was out "fix"
    > morality, rescuing it from the barren wasteland it has become due to SOM..
    >
    > [Arlo]
    > And you are saying the "free market" is immune to the "barren wasteland" of
    > SOM that effected everything else? Pirsig did not think so. Hence ZMM.

    As I said, the free market is self-correcting in that products and
    services not wanted don't survive. To you there may be a lot of junk on
    the market that you wouldn't buy. Same for me. But to believe that somehow
    you, or I or Pirsig ought to step in and eliminate what we consider to be
    junk would be a step away from freedom -- the highest good in the MOQ.

    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 : Sun Oct 23 2005 - 12:12:28 BST