From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Mon Oct 24 2005 - 13:30:16 BST
> [Arlo]
> Yep, a "reality" that denigrated Quality in production and consumption to a
> "stylized veneer" overlaid on objects. Quality, Pirsig points out, begins
> with the connection of the craftsman to his/her labor, and the object of
> that labor. The cycle is complete with a consumer base capable of seeing
> that Quality as something more than "style syrup".
Do I detect Marxism waiting in the wings to be brought on stage when the
moment is right?
> [Arlo previously]
> 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.
>
> [Platt]
> Yes. Thanks to capitalism, technology and the free market, living
> conditions for most people are much better today.
>
> [Arlo]
> Not at all. Thanks to restrictions placed on capitalism by minimum wages,
> workforce safety regulations, injury compensation and society demanding
> responsibility in production. If not for this, people would be no better
> off than 1890. Witness the lack of these regulations in popular overseas
> production companies. Long hours, little pay, sweatshop conditions, no
> health or injury, and the destitute conditions this creates. Take a trip
> down to Tijuana, Platt, where Coke and other American corporations operate
> "free" of "government interference". Far from creating a great city, it is
> a polluted, impoverished city where people have nothing to look forward to
> but 5 cents and hour and 80 hours a week of toil. If you think the absence
> of "government interference" creates more freedoms for people, I take it
> you are planning your retirement in Tijuana?
From Wikipedia: "Due to Tijuana's proximity to the USA and its cheap
labor, it is an attractive city for companies to establish extensive
industrial parks comprised of maquiladoras, factories situated near the
border to produce for export. Foreign and domestic companies employ
thousands in these plants, usually in assembly related labor. Such jobs
are demanding and ill-paid by first-world standards, but quite attractive
to many Mexicans. This makes Tijuana a popular city for poor migrant
workers from other parts of Mexico, as well as other countries to the
south."
> [Arlo previously]
> Are drug lords enriching the culture? Is "enrichment" relative, like you
> seem to indicate?
>
> [Platt]
> Well, I guess to some they are. To me, no.
>
> [Arlo]
> So, relativism is relative? If "enriching the culture" is relative, then I
> take it pretty much everybody enriches the culture. Which makes it
> meaningless. Pirsig is no better than a drug lord in this respect. Well, to
> you maybe, but since its all relative, that doesn't say much.
Those out to "enrich the culture" bear watching. They usually carry a gun
behind their back.
According to Pirsig, drugs are bad because they are biological. They make
you feel good, but destroy social patterns. To some here (which is why I
said "some" above), drugs are not only the key to nirvana but would actually
improve social relations. In any case, I say legalize drugs. That would put
your despised drug lords out of business. Would you consider that cultural
enrichment?
> [Arlo previously]
> 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?
>
> [Platt]
> 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?
>
> [Arlo]
> I know how much you'd like to sidetrack the question, but I'm not going to
> bite. If Pirsig acted unnaturally in authoring and publishing ZMM, how did
> he come to this unnatural act? Genes? Social upbringing? Culture?
I have no idea. I don't pretend to know what motivates people to do
things. Why do you ask? And why did you ignore my question about making
money?
> [Platt]
> 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.
>
> [Arlo]
> Hehe, now you're just yankin' my chain. No one said he, nor I, nor you,
> should "step in an eliminate" anything. But, like Pirsig, I think that
> people need a better language, one that sees Quality, to correct the amount
> of junk in both production and consumption.
Good. Glad to know you don't want to interfere in the free market.
That is what I call "Quality-sight enabled." :-)
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 : Mon Oct 24 2005 - 14:08:00 BST