From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Thu Oct 27 2005 - 14:27:21 BST
> [Arlo]
> Which comes full circle to my original question. What "self-interest" did
> Pirsig fulfill by authoring and seeking publication for ZMM?
It pleased him, made him happy, gave him a sense of well-being. I doubt if
he did it to make himself miserable out of some masochistic desire.
> Was the higher Quality writing it had (to quote you) "motivated by that
> which [gave Pirsig] a sense of well-being which in most cases involves
> earning money to provide for themselves and those they value, and to buy
> things that give [him] pleasure like [Honda Superhawks]"?
>
> Pirsig was in it for the money, after all? That seems opposite of what he
> said in the afterward to ZMM, where both the publisher and himself agreed
> that "the point of a book like this" is not money or profit. What, then, is
> "the point of a book like this"?
I'm sure when the money came in he didn't tear up the checks. Anyway, you
imply that's it's immoral to be "in it for the money." Is that your
position?
> One thing I'd say to your comment about self-interest, is that this is
> merely a synonym for "value", and is different (as the MOQ shows us) for
> differering levels of evolution. For example, I'd say the "self-interest"
> you talk about mostly is biological-level self-interest, where my main
> interest is my survival over anything else.
It's in your self-interest to ride your Harley, but hardly for your
survival. To assert otherwise is quite a stretch.
> On the social-level, however,
> I'd argue that self-interest evolves from its biological predecessor into
> an interest in strengthening and improving social patterns and
> responsibility to "do Good" by others.
Yes, that's what businesses have to do in a free market whereby if they
fail to "do good" according to a sufficient number of others, the
business will fail.
> Ditto on the Intellectual level,
> where self-interest serves to strengthen and improve Intellectual patterns.
> In this sense, Pirsig's "self-interest" in authoring/publishing was not
> motivated by a biological-level pattern of self-profit, but a social and
> Intellectual self-interest of improving the social and Intellectual
> patterns of his culture.
Profits make possible educational institutions that supposedly improve
intellectual patterns. But real improvement comes from business, a prime
example being the computer revolution.
> I don't think this motivation is unnatural,
> indeed, I think only a culture that encourages "self-profit" as the
> Greatest Good man can aspire to is fostering unnatural and destructive
> behavior. And, immoral too, I might add.
Profit is immoral? Self-interest is immoral? Where in the MOQ do you find
support for such a conclusion?
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 -
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 Oct 27 2005 - 15:36:48 BST