Re: MD The Simpleminds at work

From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Thu Sep 18 2003 - 19:30:45 BST

  • Next message: David MOREY: "Re: MD Evolution of levels"

    To agree with Sam
    the great thing about the levels is that you can say yeah its good on that
    level and bad on another. So you get decide that you will go one way and pay
    the price on a certain level. EG study philosophy and enjoy lots of reading
    against never going out eveer again socially -only joking.

    David M
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Sam Norton" <elizaphanian@tiscali.co.uk>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 3:30 PM
    Subject: Re: MD The Simpleminds at work

    > Hi Gert-Jan,
    >
    > I sympathise with your perspective. We're hoping to get the MF group back
    up and running before too
    > long so that some of the more involved debates have a more suitable home.
    In the meantime, the best
    > way to make sure the MD group isn't too intimidating is to do exactly what
    you've done - start up a
    > thread about your own concerns. On which topic, my two pennies:
    >
    > > There are some subjects that made me wonder, where I need your opinions.
    > >
    > > 1. I am a school teacher (children from 4 to 13) - I often get the urge
    to
    > > teach them the MoQ. Would it be wise? How would you do it?
    >
    > Start from an understanding of 'good and bad' or even 'better and worse'.
    I wouldn't worry too much
    > about the levels at the early ages - that could probably come in a bit
    later on - but the key idea
    > that value is the primary "stuff" from which all else flows - and that
    there is better and worse -
    > should be teachable, surely? (you might even want to call it 'God'.....
    ;o)
    >
    > > 2. I regularly find myself trying to explain the moq to others (friends
    > > during beer) How do you do it? What do you tell them?
    >
    > Don't know. Haven't really tried it.
    >
    > > 3. I have great troubles giving grades to creative works the children
    make.
    > > Can the MoQ be a help allthough pirsig wouldn't allow it? If yes?
    Enlighten
    > > me?
    >
    > I would be in favour - but then I think there are (or should be) agreed
    standards within a
    > discipline, whatever it is. So a discipline needs to be learned before it
    can be experimented with
    > creatively and freely. (The student follows the rules. The rebel breaks
    the rules - but is still
    > defined by them. The creative transcend the rules)
    >
    > > 4. Do some of you try to implement the MoQ into psychology (or ectually
    the
    > > other way around that is)?
    >
    > Only in an informal way - I like to pick out social level thinking (or at
    least what seems so to me,
    > from my great vantage point of knowing everything ;-) There are some
    people here who at one point
    > were looking at relating the MoQ to Eriksson, Maslow etc. The Wilber fans
    might have more to say on
    > that - not being one I can't really comment.
    >
    > > 5. If philosophy is of high intellectual quality, why get children?
    >
    > Because the higher levels do not negate the lower, they depend upon them
    for their existence. If we
    > were so caught up in intellectual rapture that we ceased to eat, the
    intellectual rapture would
    > cease. I would say that we need to flourish on all the levels at once (see
    my 'eudaimonic' paper on
    > the website), only that there needs to be a harmony around the highest
    Quality.
    >
    > > 6. Is a religion a social pattern of values? And if these patterns are
    not
    > > of high quality anymore in a culture, why teach children that religion
    > > anyway?
    >
    > This, as you would expect, is a highly contentious question! It all
    depends on what you mean by
    > 'religion'.... the people who gather and do things together on a Sunday
    morning (or Friday or
    > Saturday or whenever?). That's pretty social. The mystic off pursuing
    their vision of God? Pretty
    > dynamic really. The theologian closeted in the ivory tower debating
    whether Aquinas or Ockham was
    > the more profound thinker - that's fourth level IMHO.
    >
    > As for teaching the children, I would go back to what I said above - you
    can't have the highest
    > levels without the ones below flourishing as well. I see story as the
    'spine' of the third level (in
    > both metaphysical 'story' and religious 'story' terms) - so I don't think
    you can get away without
    > telling children stories which make sense of the world. We just have to
    thrash out which stories
    > have the highest Quality.
    >
    > > 7. Why is a policeman allowed to hit a hooligan, but is a teacher not
    > > allowed to hit a kid that the teacher can't reach intellectually or
    social?
    > > And why was it allowed in the old days? What should a teacher do, if he
    > > doesn't want to use this biological jungle-language?
    >
    > I think this is what Pirsig talks about in Lila, re the policeman and
    soldier? The issue is: does
    > society ultimately depend upon violence to exist? The MoQ says yes.
    >
    > > 8. Would it change our feelings about the whole MoQ if Pirsig appeared
    to be
    > > an ugly child-molesting sigar smoking bold woman? (like one of Roald
    Dahls
    > > witches)
    >
    > Shouldn't, but it probably would.
    >
    > > 8. When did the intellecual level started - The old greek - the
    > > renaissance - the sixties ?
    >
    > Again - this is greatly debated. I think there wasn't a clear cut start
    point. In particular I think
    > it depends upon a certain degree of economic and social sophistication to
    be held in place. Most
    > people would think Athens had an intellectual life I think.
    >
    > > 10. Is it moral to have an opinion about a President without living in
    his
    > > country? (looking at Culture A using the values of Culture B)
    >
    > Yes. To say otherwise is to say that there is no universal scale of
    values - which I think the MoQ
    > would deny (even if it would also say that anyone who claims
    authoritatively 'I have found the
    > TRUTH' etc should be treated with suspicion..)
    >
    > > 11. Can I tell you all Gandi was a great guy using my $2000,- computer?
    >
    > I think so. Gandhi wanted to affirm the values of his culture, and he was
    quite happy to have the
    > dhoti and spinning wheel. I think there is a nihilistic rejection of
    wealth in some counter-cultural
    > programmes, which (IMHO) Gandhi wouldn't have bought into. He didn't like
    greed, of course, but I'm
    > not sure that 'voluntary simplicity' necessarily rejects the computer age.
    Is your computer a tool
    > or a toy? Does your use of it bring Quality into your life?
    >
    >
    > Thanks for the questions.
    >
    > 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
    >
    >

    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 : Thu Sep 18 2003 - 19:29:15 BST