From: ant.mcwatt@ntlworld.com
Date: Tue Jul 06 2004 - 01:33:16 BST
Platt stated July 5th:
Hi Anthony,
Your "MOQ Perception of Capitalism" lacks footnotes referring to Pirsig's
writings. In contrast, your "MOQ Perception of Socialism" contains three
direct Pirsig quotes.
I mention this because as I read your capitalism description, I didn't
recognize anything that Pirsig actually said…
Ant McWatt comments:
You certainly like giving me homework these days, Mr Holden! I really have to get back to revising for my viva in August though for one last time (at least, for a while) I’ll try to address your queries:
------------------------------------------------------------
Platt stated July 5th: for instance, where did Pirsig say . . .
. . . capitalism exploits sweat shop labor?
Robert Pirsig stated to Anthony McWatt January 15th 1994:
“Labor is commonly exploited in the name of ‘free-enterprise’ but in my opinion labor unions, as business agents for the workers, are very much a part of the free enterprise system, and tend to equalize economic forces.”
Ant McWatt comments:
As sweat shop labour is non-unionised labour then Pirsig would obviously conclude that this part of the global workforce is exploited by capitalism.
Moreover, in LILA (Chapter 17) it’s stated that:
The conservatives [i.e. read capitalists] who keep trumpeting about the virtues
of free enterprise are normally just supporting their own self-interest.
They are just doing the usual cover-up for the rich in their age-old
exploitation of the poor.
------------------------------------------------------------
Platt stated July 5th: for instance, where did Pirsig say . . . [that] equity in the distribution of products is morally desirable?
Ant McWatt comments:
That’s Rader & Jessup (1976, p. 376) so that’s not an MOQ sentiment though in LILA (Chapter 22), Pirsig does state:
‘The greatest satisfaction of the greatest number, rather than social tradition, is what determines what is moral and what is not. The scientific test of a "vice" should not be, "Does society approve or disapprove?" The test should be, "Is it rational or irrational?"’
‘For example, drinking that causes car accidents or loss of work or family
problems is irrational. That kind of drinking is a vice. It does not
contribute to the greatest satisfaction of the greatest number. On the
other hand, drinking is not irrational when it produces mere social or
intellectual relaxation. That kind of drinking is not a vice.’
Ant McWatt comments:
As such, it seems that the MOQ does imply a rational distribution of material products even if it doesn’t support an absolute equity in this distribution.
------------------------------------------------------------
Platt stated July 5th: for instance, where did Pirsig say . . . [that] material success is a "hollow goal"?
I think this is a central theme of ZMM and is nearly literally stated at the end of following paragraph:
‘The cause of our current social crises, he would have said, is a genetic defect within the nature of reason itself. And until this genetic defect is cleared, the crises will continue. Our current modes of rationality are not moving society forward into a better world. They are taking it further and further from that better world. Since the Renaissance these modes have worked. As long as the need for food, clothing and shelter is dominant they will continue to work. But now that for huge masses of people these needs no longer overwhelm everything else, the whole structure of reason, handed down to us from ancient times, is no longer adequate. It begins to be seen for what it really is... emotionally HOLLOW, esthetically meaningless and spiritually empty. That, today, is where it is at, and will continue to be at for a long time to come.’
(ZMM, Chapter Ten)
This is also implied in the following interview:
‘I was very sympathetic to the rebellion of the Sixties because I'd gone through a very similar rebellion [in the Fifties]. My father couldn't understand what it was that made me insist; well, not insist, but feel that I had to get out of this country or go crazy. It - the whole idea - this was back in 1950 - the whole idea that one should become another Ronald Reagan and move up ahead - not Ronald Reagan himself but the roles that he played as the all-American good guy; lives the happy, suburban life - was so expected of people that anyone who felt that was inadequate was regarded as suspicious, or at least a person with deep personal problems. The fact that the problems might be the problems of the culture rather than the problems of the individual would never have dawned on anybody back in the Fifties.’
(Pirsig speaking to Tim Wilson and David Chernick, "More than Motorcycle Maintenance" for CBC Radio’s "New Ideas" Series, 1975.)
------------------------------------------------------------
Platt stated July 5th: for instance, where did Pirsig say . . . [that] science dismisses "Quality of Life" issues?
Ant McWatt comments:
This is implied in the following section from LILA (Chapter 22):
‘Phædrus had no "cause" that he could explain to anybody. His cause was the
QUALITY OF his LIFE, which could not be framed in the "objective" language
of the intellectuals and therefore in their eyes was not a cause at all.
He knew that intellectually contrived technological devices had increased
in number and complexity, but he didn't think the ability to enjoy these
devices had increased in proportion. He didn't think you could say with
certainty that people are any happier than they were during the Victorian
era. This "pursuit of happiness" seemed to have become like the pursuit of
some scientifically created, mechanical rabbit that moves ahead at whatever
speed it is pursued. If you ever did catch it for a few moments it had a
peculiar synthetic, technological taste that made the whole pursuit seem
senseless.’
‘Everyone seemed to be guided by an "objective," "scientific" view of life
that told each person that his essential self is his evolved material body.’
And, in ZMM (Chapter Ten) where it’s stated:
‘What Phædrus observed on a personal level was a phenomenon, profoundly characteristic of the history of science, which has been swept under the carpet for years. The predicted results of scientific enquiry and the actual results of scientific enquiry are diametrically opposed here, and no one seems to pay too much attention to the fact. The purpose of scientific method is to select a single truth from among many hypothetical truths. That, more than anything else, is what science is all about. But historically science has done exactly the opposite. Through multiplication upon multiplication of facts, information, theories and hypotheses, it is science itself that is leading mankind from single absolute truths to multiple, indeterminate, relative ones. The major producer of the social chaos, the indeterminacy of thought and values that rational knowledge is supposed to eliminate, is none other than science itself. And what Phædrus saw in the isolation of his own laboratory work years ago is now seen everywher
e in the technological world today. Scientifically produced anti-science.’
------------------------------------------------------------
Platt stated July 5th:
You and others (who you refer to) may believe these things about the
capitalistic free enterprise system, and Pirsig may believe them, too. But
in the absence supporting quotations from the man himself, I don't see how
you can legitimately present them as the "MOQ Perspective."
Ant McWatt comments:
Firstly, you’ve got to remember that Pirsig lived through the McCarthy era. I therefore doubt that many people of his generation (though Chomsky is a notable exception) are going to couch their arguments against capitalism that explicitly.
Secondly, Pirsig (very kindly) read through the Textbook twice to ensure what it stated about the MOQ was, more or less, accurate. As far as Section 7.2. (THE MOQ PERCEPTION OF CAPITALISM) is concerned he queried a line in the Rader & Jessup quote which I consequently edited out (as far as I remember) but that was all. Of course, it doesn’t necessarily mean that he fully endorses this section (as with any other part of the Textbook) but, at the same time, it won’t be that much out of kilter with how he understands the MOQ either.
Finally, Platt stated July 5th:
Do you have "inside" information from Pirsig that the rest of don't have
regarding his views of capitalism? If so, would you care to share it with
us?
Ant McWatt comments:
Whatever his views when he was younger, I think Pirsig is presently a lot more interested in establishing the MOQ and, through doing so, primarily improve the Western quality of life. As I said previously, I think we should move onto developing this rather than pondering which out-dated SOM-based economic system Pirsig perceived as the most problematic. It’s pretty obvious that he recognised serious problems with both.
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 : Tue Jul 06 2004 - 01:34:47 BST