From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Tue Mar 16 2004 - 12:50:17 GMT
Leland:
> On Mar 13, 2004, at 7:59, Platt Holden wrote:
>
> > I reject religions based on faith including Christianity and Islam.
>
> There is still validity in faith-based religions. When you think about it,
> 'faith' is the belief in the existence of something you cannot sense. DQ
> COULD be considered by some to be an article of faith (no different from
> 'god' in this sense).
DQ could be considered by some to be an article of faith, but they would
be wrong. Pirsig makes it clear that we possess, along with other physical
senses, and sense of DQ. In his SODV paper, Pirsig spells it out:
"Metaphysics of Quality follows the empirical tradition here in saying
that the senses are the starting point of reality, but -- all importantly -
- it includes a sense of value. Values are phenomena. To ignore them is to
misread the world. It says this sense of value, of liking or disliking, is
a primary sense that is a kind of gatekeeper for everything else an infant
learns. At birth this sense of value is extremely Dynamic but as the
infant grows up this sense of value becomes more and more influenced by
accumulated static patterns."
> > I reject all religious sects because their rituals and practices
> > promulgate static social patterns.
>
> Static social patterns of some kind are necessary, or the whole social
> level will degenerate (at least to the last statically latched level). You
> couldn't really have an intellectual level if the social level didn't
> exist, since we'd all be focussed on the biological stuff (eating,
> sleeping, fucking). The social level is the foundation on which the
> intellectual level rests.
No argument there. But, there are many social patterns besides static
religious ones. The most important in the U.S. is our Constitution which
guarantees individual rights to free speech, trial by jury, etc. This is
the key social pattern that supports the intellectual level. Of course,
it's under attack by socialists who think the collective should always
take precedence over individual rights. The spread of laws against so-
called "hate speech" is a case in point.
> > I reject social moral codes based on divine revelation such as the 10
> > commandments because they have no intellectual base.
>
> I might disagree with you on some of the commandments. Items such as
> "thou shalt not kill" are extremely valid. However, I'd say that any
> validity the commandments have is on a social level, not an
> intellectual one.
That's my point. Social moral codes ought to be based on intellect, not on
social traditions. Pirsig has given us an intellectual basis for
determining right and wrong.
> > I seek to understand the conceptually unknown through art because its
> > essence is, as Pirsig asserts, aesthetic. Thus I find some religious art
> > to be inspirational and revealing of DQ.
> >
> > For me, art and beauty can make a direct connection to Dynamic Quality.
> > That's my religion. IMO there's none better.
>
> My question is, can you see the 'art' in non-artistic places? For
> instance, although I'm not a "car guy", I can recognize the art in the
> internal combustion engine. There is art in unexpected places, keep your
> eyes open.
Absolutely. You must be familiar with David Gelernter's book 'Machine
Beauty.' He argues, and I agree, that both computer hardware and software
could use a strong infusion of "art."
IMO there are no non-artistic places, only beautiful places and ugly
places with a range in between, like paintings in gallery.
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 - 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 Mar 16 2004 - 12:49:56 GMT