From: Paul Turner (paulj.turner@ntlworld.com)
Date: Tue Nov 25 2003 - 17:07:15 GMT
Hi Mati
Paul previously:
I think democracy is described, in MOQ terms, as a part of an intellect
vs. society moral code and is not entirely an intellectual pattern of
values (except as a concept or ideology). In fact, I think that the
application of democracy is most visible as a social pattern (of
government) - one that, in principle, does no harm to intellectual
patterns.
Mati responds:
Ok, I have grown to believe that "intellectual capacity", reverts back
to Bodvar's SOLAQI.
Paul:
Okay, then we are really discussing two different theories - I'm trying
to apply Pirsig's ideas, not Bo's. My arguments against Bo's SOLAQI are
all in the archives from this summer so I won't go into that again
except to say that I think intellect is just the conscious and
deliberate activity of constructing, manipulating or understanding
patterns of thought.
Mati said:
I have been reading over the last several months the Gulag Archipelago,
by Alexander S., he illustrates, again and again, how the social culture
of Russia under Stalin repressed any and all who were able to
intellectualize the times. They were seen as a threat of the social
order that Stalin wanted to create. I believe that was the case when the
Russians executed my grandfather during WWII. I finally understood that
as intellectual he was seen as a subversive and he had to go.
Paul:
I don't disagree with this description of events. My point is simply
that whilst it may be so that there is no democracy without intellect,
it does not follow that there is no intellect without democracy. Both
democracy and fascism have social and intellectual components. I think
democracy is better than fascism because, in the intellect vs. society
struggle, it favours intellect; fascism favours society.
Paul prev:
This repression of "illegal intellectual patterns" is not limited to any
part of the world; I would think it is a matter of intensity rather than
a clear cut absence of an entire evolutionary level. The west has its
"illegal patterns" too.
Mati asked:
What "illegal patterns" are you referring to?
Paul:
Patterns that threaten the western mythos. The patterns of the "insane,"
maybe the patterns of users of mind-altering drugs who claim to see the
insanity of western sanity. The patterns of revolutionaries and
anarchists, hackers and maybe even corporate/government crime
whistle-blowers. Sure, you won't be publicly beaten or lined up and shot
for holding these patterns, but, like I said - the repression of
intellectual patterns is a matter of intensity.
"Obviously no culture wants its legal patterns violated, and when they
are, an immune system takes over in ways that are analogous to a
biological immune system. The deviant dangerous source of illegal
cultural patterns is first identified, then isolated and finally
destroyed as a cultural entity. That's what mental hospitals are partly
for. And also heresy trials. They protect the culture from foreign ideas
that if allowed to grow unchecked could destroy the culture itself."
[Lila p.376]
Paul previously:
Also, the way I see it, the U.S. and its allies need to concentrate on
building some stable social patterns first to fill the vacuum created by
destroying the old ones.
Mati said:
I will disagree here. In principle it sounds right but won't get you
very far.
Paul:
What use is the ideal of democracy without the stable social patterns of
a functioning government, a respected police force, schools, press,
hospitals, employment, economy and so on?
Mati said:
The biggest threat to Iraq and it's social structure is the threat of
intellectualization.
and
The fact is I don't think MOQ or any other intellectualization will pose
a threat. Only in cases where the religion is oppressive in nature will
intellectualization takes it's mark.
Paul:
I'm confused by this Mati, there appears to be a contradiction in your
statements. Also, I didn't say anything about intellectualisation
(although I'm not clear on what that means, particularly if you are
using Bo's definition of intellect) posing a threat to Iraq.
Mati said:
What is needed in Iraq is the development of a intellectual base that
has it's roots in Islam that can sustain democracy.
Paul:
Yes, and stable social patterns to sustain the intellectual patterns.
Mati quoted Pirsig:
"Society exists primarily to free people from the biological chains. It
has done that job so stunningly well intellectuals forget the fact and
turned upon society with a shameful ingratitude for what society has
done......One reason why fundamentalist Moslem culture has 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 353
The other reason I would say is that Intellectual level of the US that
has brought War to it country...
Paul interrupts:
Some have argued that social patterns of long term economic might have
brought war to Iraq - that is an "illegal intellectual pattern" though
;-)
Mati:
...and now occupation has a difficult time creating a rational for
"Freedom" in the minds of the Iraq's. The Iraq's will need to look
beyond the social transgression and contemplate its intellectual
freedom. I hope they can do that.
Paul:
Agreed, but Iraq can do this without "turning upon" its social patterns.
Intellect does not replace society any more than society replaces
biology. The levels aren't "eras," to be permanently left behind. This
is precisely what Pirsig is saying in the quote you provided, each level
offers freedom from the static forces below and must not be completely
undermined. Morality is not about picking one level over all others, it
is a complex struggle, a balancing act.
"The Metaphysics of Quality concludes that social codes should not be
followed blindly, but should not be attacked blindly either. They should
be dusted off and re-examined, fairly and impartially, to see what they
were trying to accomplish and what they actually did accomplish toward
building a stronger society. We must understand that when a society
undermines intellectual freedom for its own purposes it is absolutely
morally bad, but when it represses biological freedom for its own
purposes it is absolutely morally good. These moral bads and goods are
not just "customs." They are as real as rocks and trees. The destructive
sympathy by intellectuals toward lawlessness in the sixties and since is
derived, no doubt, from what is perceived to be a common enemy, the
social system. But the Metaphysics of Quality concludes that this
sympathy was really stupid. The decades since the sixties have borne
this out." [Lila p.355-356]
"Intellect can support static patterns of society without fear of
domination by carefully distinguishing those moral issues that are
social-biological from those that are intellectual-social and making
sure there is no encroachment either way." [Lila p.345]
cheers
Paul
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 : Tue Nov 25 2003 - 17:07:07 GMT