MD A conflict of values

From: Elizaphanian (elizaphanian@tiscali.co.uk)
Date: Wed Mar 26 2003 - 17:57:50 GMT

  • Next message: johnny moral: "Re: MD Burden of Proof"

    Hello all,

    From p314 of my copy of Lila (chapter 24)

    "Today we are living in an intellectual and technological paradise and a
    moral and social nightmare because the intellectual level of evolution, in
    its struggle to become free of the social level, has ignored the social
    level's role in keeping the biological level under control. Intellectuals
    have failed to understand the ocean of biological quality that is constantly
    being suppressed by social order. Biological quality is necessary to the
    survival of life. But when it threatens to dominate and destroy society,
    biological quality becomes evil itself, the 'Great Satan' of
    twentieth-century Western culture. One reason why fundamentalist Moslem
    cultures have become so fanatic in their hatred of the West is that it has
    released the biological forces of evil that Islam has fought for centuries
    to control."

    Pirsig also writes (p317)
    "Cultures can be graded and judged morally according to their contribution
    to the evolution of life."

    I wanted to raise a question about the present conflict in Iraq, although it
    may end up being an assertion, I'm not quite sure yet.

    One of the comments about the war that struck me was (paraphrased) 'if one
    side thinks that it is a war of religion, then it doesn't matter if the
    other side denies it - it will be a conflict at that level'.

    It seems clear to me - and Pirsig makes the point himself - that the
    presently constructed Western way of life is not without flaws. In
    particular, the triumph of a certain form of intellectual analysis,
    prevalent in the 1960's (and still current in the anti-war protests, so it
    seems to me) has gravely undermined the social basis of Western society.
    This is one of the most obvious features of the West, to a non-Westerner,
    and one of the most frightening.

    It seems legitimate for a society to reject that way of life, in so far as
    that society seeks to preserve its own existence.

    It is no accident that this is related to a Modernist, ie secular, mind-set.
    Historically, it is the religious institutions that have acted to keep
    biological patterns in order - when those religious institutions are
    undermined (or, in more practical terms, completely sidelined in "serious"
    discussion at the highest levels of leadership) then those biological
    patterns re-emerge. The division between Church and State, for example,
    'privatises' religion, leaving matters of public affairs to politicians. We
    can argue about whether the Church/State division is a good or a bad thing
    (I think, probably, a good thing), but that it is a constituent part of the
    dominant Western culture seems unarguable - less in terms of the practical
    division, than in terms of the underlying psychology and scale of values.
    England, for example, is much less religious than the US, even though
    England is, technically, a more clearly theocratic state than most countries
    (a state religion which validates the head of state, and which the head of
    state is in charge of).

    The Islamic societies (I believe) do not accept this Church/State division,
    nor many of the other 'enlightenment' era Western developments.

    Yet we are about to see, I think, the imposition of Western values upon the
    state of Iraq. There seems to be a significant strand of US thinking - not
    alien to the UK leadership either - which sees, for example, the complex of
    democracy/human rights/free trade/property/rule of law as being
    unambiguously good for all people, not just for Westerners.

    That imposition will likely be resisted on more general grounds than a
    resistance to democracy etc. It will be resisted because the culture that
    imposes democracy is self-destructive, in so far as it suffers from an
    intellectual undermining of social controls. Bin Laden is a hero for a few
    good reasons, as well as for many more bad ones.

    Where am I going with this?

    The US and UK are about to impose Western values on Iraq. Those Western
    values will be resisted by (many?) Iraqis/Muslims elsewhere because it is
    perceived as undermining society. In resisting the West as a whole, for this
    reason, that resistance has Quality. Yet equally clearly (to me), the US
    imposition of democracy etc is of higher Quality than the alternative
    (letting Saddam carry on torturing).

    This is a very large conflict between the West and the Muslim world, which
    western elites are essentially blind to (especially in Europe). The conflict
    is much more deeply rooted than seems generally accepted - and the MoQ
    provides a very good way of analysing why.

    For if Pirsig is correct, then there is a sense in which Western societies
    are clearly inferior to Islamic societies, in terms of a contribution to the
    evolution of life. And whatever happens in this particular war, the conflict
    is not going to go away - on the contrary, it will escalate, and - I
    believe - next time it will involve nuclear weapons.

    And unless the West realises the stakes involved - and transforms itself,
    and renews itself - then it will lose. For military sophistication, being
    the instrument of control between the social and biological levels, cannot
    overcome an intellectual pattern of values. And the assessment that the West
    unleashes biological chaos is an intellectual assessment (for Islam, just as
    much as Christianity, operates at the intellectual level). And hordes of
    jihadis will overcome hordes of intellectuals every time. It may not happen
    soon, but if nothing changes, then it will happen.

    For the West to 'win' such a conflict (what counts as 'winning' here?
    survival?) it must change. It must seek to win the hearts and minds - of its
    own populations, as much as anyone else. Fortunately, the leading Western
    nation is 'the most dynamic' society ever known. And it's peoples are not as
    cynical or blase about religion as Western Europeans. Which means that there
    is some room for hope. For there are things in Western society which are
    worth fighting for.

    I don't mean to be contentious or offensive with this. It's just something
    that I'm worrying about, and I would welcome comments.

    Sam

    "...the clash between us and them is not a military clash. Oh, no. It is a
    cultural one, a religious one. And our military victories do not solve the
    offensive of Islamic terrorism. On the contrary, they encourage it. They
    exacerbate it, they multiply it. The worst is still to come." - Oriana
    Fallaci

    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 : Wed Mar 26 2003 - 18:19:21 GMT