From: ant.mcwatt@ntlworld.com
Date: Sun Jul 04 2004 - 15:37:52 BST
Platt stated July 3rd 2004:
> Hi Anthony,
>
> Thanks for furnishing more information about Harris in answer to my
> request. I appreciate the time and trouble you took.
Ant McWatt comments:
No problem, I hope you found the Harris material of interest.
Platt stated July 3rd 2004:
> …your support of socialism and mine of capitalism brings up a
> more general question that I hope you (and perhaps others) will comment
> on, namely the following quote from Lila, Chap. 29 in which Pirsig writes:
>
> "He wanted particularly to see how much actual evidence there was for the
> statement that James's whole purpose was to "unite science and religion."
> That claim had turned him against James years ago, and he didn't like it any
> better now. When you start out with an axe like that to grind, it's almost
> guaranteed that you will conclude with something false. The statement
> seemed more like some philosophological simplification written by someone
> with a weak understanding of what philosophy is for. To put philosophy in the
> service of any social organization or any dogma is immoral. It's a lower form
> of evolution trying to devour a higher one." (Lila, 29)
Ant McWatt comments:
A good quote which indicates the difficulty of retaining an open mind despite the presence of already established intellectual static patterns which may, at first sight, appear in complete contradiction to new information.
Platt stated July 3rd 2004:
> If our mutual "ax to grind" is using the MOQ to "improve the general
> quality of life" are we, in effect, "putting philosophy in the service of
> a social organization--you in socialism and me in capitalism--with dogmas
> attending both sides?
Ant McWatt comments:
Well, I do try to put the MOQ perspective first though of course, at times, it’s easier said than done.
Platt stated July 3rd 2004:
> Perhaps your study of the MOQ and correspondence with Pirsig will shed
> some light on whether we, in asserting our strong but opposing political
> views using the MOQ as support, are in some sense employing a "lower form
> of evolution to devour a higher one."
Ant McWatt comments:
As Gav has already noted, your sentiment here is correct and I do remember Pirsig reminding me (and Dr Harris) not to use Quality in the service of business a couple of times around 1999-2000 when Harris and I (together with another post-graduate at Liverpool) seriously considered establishing some sort of MOQ Institute. As Pirsig said, business (of whatever form) must be subservient to the requirements of Quality.
Quality first, Business second!
Moreover, I certainly got the impression that Pirsig thought it was more important with working on one’s individual self towards Quality thought and action rather than emphasising socially based programs. This idea of gradual Quality evolution from the ground upwards rather than being imposed from above is very much a Buddhist idea (e.g. if everyone was enlightened it would be highly doubtful, for example, that there would be any armed conflict in the world or that anyone would suffer from unfair business practices). If ZMM and LILA are examined carefully, this Buddhist sentiment is certainly in the background, here and there.
Platt stated July 3rd 2004:
> If not, then it's back to the fun of arguing about the relative merits and
> moral values of our respective positions, drawing upon the MOQ for
> validity when it suits our purpose.
Ant McWatt comments:
I perceive the MOQ as an improvement and development from previously established ideas and, as far as socialism and capitalism are concerned, the MOQ attempts to combine the best ideas from both systems. As mentioned before, this is why I find it (as Pirsig eventually did with James’ idea of uniting science and religion) more beneficial to move on from holding onto either one of these previous systems (though I’d still give Thatcher an un-Buddhist V-sign if I saw her out on the road and Bill Clinton a handshake) and proceeding towards an MOQ orientated perspective.
Now isn’t that a more interesting challenge?
Best wishes,
Anthony.
-----------------------------------------
Email provided by http://www.ntlhome.com/
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 Jul 04 2004 - 15:41:23 BST