From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sat May 15 2004 - 17:04:31 BST
Dear Wim,
> I accept Dave S. amendment of my thinking about rationality/irrationality by
> distinguishing pre-rationality, rationality and transrationality plus healthy
> and unhealthy manifestations of these. I do not presuppose that Americans are
> distributed differently between these categories (or express them in different
> proportions) than Europeans or Dutch. I was just trying to figure out what
> truth there is behind the statistic that 59% of Americans believe Revelations
> to be literally true and the suggestion in my source article in that they are
> willing to act (in the political realm) on that belief. That statistic
> (combined with the 2,5% for the Dutch mentioned in that article) suggests
> something I'm not willing to believe yet. So I need your help to give me
> counterstatistics and/or experience. (A claim that in your experience
> Americans are no more or less rational than people in other Western nations
> requires more supportive detail.) Platt's Gallup statistic that 50% of
> Americans call themselves religious and an additional 33% calls themselves
> spiritual but not religious doesn't necessarily prove the 59% wrong.
What do you think the chances are that those who call themselves spiritual
take the bible literally? I would say none. Of the 50 percent of Americans
who call themselves religious, only the fundamentalist sects take the bible
literally and they are definitely in the minority. So will "proof" may too
strong, such statistics cast extreme doubt on your 59 percent claim.
> That
> depends on what Americans mean with 'religious' and 'spiritual'. (In the
> Netherlands these percentages would be considerably but not as drastically
> lower as the 59%/2,5% comparison suggests, but I have no statistics at hand.)
Do you have any other statistics about religion either of the Netherlands or
Europe? According to the last American census, the breakdown of religious
affiliation by percentage is: Protestant 53, Catholic 28, Jewish 2, Other 8
and None 9. What are the comparable percentages in Europe?
> David B.'s statistic of 60 million sold copies in Tim LaHaye's "Left Behind"
> series DOES support the 59% statistic (if you take into account that the
> majority of people who hardly ever read a book are apparently catered for by
> 'a movie or two'. Probably by radio and television too, even though David B.
> doesn't mention these.)
Correct me if I'm wrong but the "Left Behind" series consists of at least 8
fictional novels. How 60 million copies sold, (assuming that figure is
correct) supports your 59 percent statistic escapes me. 59 percent of the
total adult American population is 123 million. Neither the figures, nor the
fictional content of the books, support your statistic. Many consider the
books just a good read, not a reflection of their religious beliefs.
> I don't think being religious is in itself proof of pre-rationality,
> rationality, transrationality or of healthy/unhealthy manifestations of
> these.
Right. Some think all religious beliefs are irrational, but to believe in
resurrection or reincarnation is no more irrational than to believe that life
arose from the lifeless and mind arose from the mindless. I call such
thinking, "Holden's fallacy of ignored premises."
> Platt wrote 13 May 2004 14:27:41 -0400:
> 'I always thought that Pirsig defines the fourth level by its rationality.'
>
> The only definition by Pirsig of the fourth level is in terms of symbols.
> 'Lila' doesn't contain a definition. 'Rational' is mentioned as a criterion at
> the 4th level, but I found no quotes suggesting that irrational, prerational
> or transrational thinking would not belong to the 4th level (as lower or
> higher quality symbolic patterns of value compared to rational ones).
Well, you may be right in the sense that the MOQ considers SOM irrational
because of the latter's inability to understand that morals are facts. But I
get the distinct impression that by Pirsig's emphasis on the dominance of the
intellectual pattern of subject-object science in the fourth level that the
fourth level is primarily rational but seriously flawed. To carry it a step
further, all rational thinking is flawed in that it's based on irrational
(mythic) premises (Godel's Theorem). Because its inability to prove its
premises, rationalism is a fundamentalist ideology.
> Platt concluded:
> 'I think the third level is dominated by more or less automatic human
> behavior but not completely without thinking or behavior motivated by
> mindful symbolic manipulation. Organized religion is a shining example of
> symbolism over substance (to coin a phrase). But more than that, the
> biological energy the Giant sucks up from humans to attain it's own ends
> includes brainpower. Otherwise, New York City could never have been built.'
>
> According to Pirsig's definition 'mindful symbolic manipulation' would
> belong to the 4th level. That (relatively) modern 3rd level patterns of
> values have come into being under the influence of symbolic patterns of
> value doesn't show that the 3rd level contains symbol manipulation, but that
> there is some interaction between the 3rd and 4th levels.
There's interaction for sure. So much for the idea that the levels are
"discrete" if by discrete one means the levels can't affect one another.
> 4th Level patterns
> of value can promote the stability and versatility of 3rd level patterns of
> value and stimulate 3rd level evolution towards DQ. (Usually they have
> 'purposes of their own' however and their influence on 3rd level habitual
> behaviour is relatively marginal. 3rd Level evolution has a much slower pace
> than 4th level evolution.)
Agree.
Best regards,
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 : Sat May 15 2004 - 17:02:50 BST