Re: MD The mythology of science

From: Elizaphanian (elizaphanian@tiscali.co.uk)
Date: Sun Jun 15 2003 - 16:14:08 BST

  • Next message: Elizaphanian: "Re: MD The Eudaimonic MoQ"

    Hi David,

    > dmb replies:
    > We can't help but look at the world through our own eyes, so to speak. It
    > true. And I'm curious about how and why you've come to see intellect as
    > "entrenched and oppressive". Very curious.

    Put it down to searching for DQ and not finding it in academia (but finding it elsewhere).

    > In this case it seems that my basic perceptions agree with Pirsig's, no?
    > Does he not also see freedom, rights, democracy and other such liberating
    > forces as a product of the intellect? That's pretty far away from
    > oppressive, no? And entrenched? Compared to what? Its it more entrenched
    > than the social level, which has been evolving for hundreds of thousands of
    > years? According to Pirsig and common sense the intellect is less entrenched
    > than just any about anything eles, no? And I think the impression that
    > intellect is being resisted, especially by those who hold social level
    > values most dear, if not embattled, is demonstrated by mountains of
    > historical evidence.
    >
    > In other words, your personal experiences are not to be discounted or
    > dismissed, but if we are talking about the nature of things and the state of
    > the world we must allow the facts and evidence to bear the appropriate
    > weight in that discussion, regardless of how we might feel about it. The is
    > something dishonest about disregarding the facts, no? This is a good example
    > of where thinking rationally actually requires a certain kind of morality.
    > (I'm not making any accusations here, just making a point.) Likewise, I know
    > from personal experience that being witness to such dishonesty can evoke a
    > very strong emotion. I'm not sure what to call it. Its a little bit LIKE
    > outrage, disgust or anger, but not exactly. You know what I mean, eh?

    I think if I put "DMB's attacking social stuff" as a sign hanging around the neck of your posts, it
    would help me to disagree with you less :-) I agree that social level elements are more firmly
    entrenched than level 4 - but then, level 3 is also still under attack from level 2. So perhaps the
    conflict will never end. My concern is to ensure that the defense of level 4 doesn't block out the
    light of DQ (which I think the 'standard' MoQ can tend towards).

    Sam

    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 Jun 15 2003 - 16:32:35 BST