From: Arlo Bensinger (ajb102@psu.edu)
Date: Mon Oct 24 2005 - 21:06:05 BST
Platt, This is somewhat of a resend... hit the send button prematurely
earlier, so this is a full response. -Arlo
[Arlo previously]
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".
[Platt]
Do I detect Marxism waiting in the wings to be brought on stage when the
moment is right?
[Arlo]
I make no bones about seeing a parallel in thought between Pirsig and Marx
on labor and Quality in production and consumption, and how the last
century of amoral SOM has effected the production and consumption of goods.
From craftsmanship and identification with the object of one's labor, and
power over the "flow" of decisions, to the building-in of this cultural
defect "into the products" (as Pirsig demonstrated) to a marketplace
overloaded with "junk", and no means for a cultural recognition of the
problem (SOMist language restrictions). The "funeral procession of the
Interstates", as Pirsig discusses in ZMM, is a funeral procession of
alienated labor, which is a natural part of the larger disconnect caused by
an inability to recognize Quality in the cultural language, itself the
SOMist problem of the last century*.
* I say the last century, because although Aristotelian SOM dates back to
the ancient Greeks, until this century social morality (religion mostly)
did offer a "Good". When that was overturned by Intellect, the value-free
SOM was given charge of society. Hence, although the SOMist problem dates
back centuries (as discussed in ZMM), it is magnified drastically in this
last century. All the defects discussed in ZMM and Lila focus on the last
century as one where an absence of Quality has become critically profound.
[Platt on the Joys of Unfettered Capitalism in Bringing Freedoms to Tijuana
that We In Our Socialized State Lack]
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.
[Arlo]
If this is so much better, why don't many "first-world" people demand to be
like them?
[Platt continues]
This makes Tijuana a popular city for poor migrant workers from other parts
of Mexico, as well as other countries to the south."
[Arlo]
That near-abject poverty and servitude to corporations providing sub-first
world standards is better than abject poverty is missing the point. If your
theory (that returning to an 1890s workplace is higher Quality) is correct,
then they should be doing better than us, not existing by standards that no
"American" would want to live under.
The point is, if this "deregulation" provides a better world, and more
freedoms for more people, then Tijuana should be a place that most
Americans wish to emulate. Tijuanese workers should be enjoying a boon of
freedoms brought about by no minimum wage, no overtime laws, no workplace
safety regulations, no compensation, etc. Are they? Do you think most
American workers would love to trade places with the Tijuanese workers, so
that they can thrive under the no-regulation capitalism?
[Arlo previously]
Are drug lords enriching the culture? Is "enrichment" relative, like you
seem to indicate?
[Platt responded]
Well, I guess to some they are. To me, no.
[Arlo then...]
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.
[Platt]
Those out to "enrich the culture" bear watching. They usually carry a gun
behind their back.
[Arlo]
??? How does that answer the question?
[Arlo previously]
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?
[Platt]
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?
[Arlo]
You certainly do pretend to know what motivates people. You said
straight-out, "profit". If Pirsig's motivation was unnatural (i.e., not
profit-driven), how was it that he came to this strange and bizarre motivation?
About money, I think social-conditioning makes "profit" (money) the
prime-motivator, but I believe this to be "unnatural". On the
biological-level, the primary motivator is self-interest. But the
social-level was formed to overcome this. You want to retreat back to it, I
say promoting biological-level self-interest as the Highest Human Motivator
is not only disingenuous, but destructive. I believe "social beings" are
naturally motivated to improve and enrich their society. Only an unnatural
reversion to biological-level motivation condemns that. Pirsig acted in the
normal way I would expect a social-level individual to act, motivated by a
higher goal than self-interest. Something that belongs part of social
Quality dialogue, and not perverted by those who wish to revert motivation
(responding to Quality) to biological-level drives.
Arlo
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 - 23:58:05 BST