From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Mon Jul 12 2004 - 11:45:40 BST
Platt adds some thoughts to Arlo's thoughts:
> Arlo adds some thoughts:
>
> > > Pirsig says in LILA (Chapter 17):
> > > "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.
> >
> > Distortion by omission: Pirsig says: "A free market is a Dynamic
> > institution." (Lila, 17)
> Distortion by false relation: "Free market" is not a blanket synonymn with
> "modern capitalism", except in a purely dichotomous, dualistic world
> ("modern capitalism" versus "evil"), or in a case where vested interests
> want to control the dialogue by pretending the two are the only choices.
Guess you disagree with DMB who thinks Pirsig means capitalists when he
(Pirsig) refers to free enterprise. Is Pirsig also guilty of "false
relation?"
> > > Even though Pirsig also says:
> > > "From a static point of view socialism is more moral than capitalism.
> > > Its a higher form of evolution. It is an intellectually guided society,
> > > not just a society based on mindless traditions."
> >
> > Distortion by omission: Pirsig says: "But what the socialists left out
> > and what has all but killed their whole undertaking is an absence of a
> > concept of indefinite Dynamic Quality."
> Distortion by dichotomy: The only two choices are not eastern-bloc
> socialism and modern American capitalism. Just because the eastern-blocs
> were wrong, does not ipso facto make modern capitalism right.
You contradict Pirsig who used the "dichotomy" of free enterprise and
socialism. And where did "modern American capitalism" and "eastern-blocs
socialism" come from? Not from me. Not from Pirsig.
> > > AND (Pirsig's emphasis)
> > >
> > > "It is not that Victorian social economic patterns are more moral than
> > > socialist intellectual economic patterns. Quite the opposite. They are
> > > LESS moral as static patterns go."
> >
> > Distortion by omission. Pirsig says, "What makes the free-enterprise
> > system superior is that the socialists, reasoning intelligently and
> > objectively, have inadvertently closed the door to Dynamic Quality in the
> > buying and selling of things."
> Dichotomous distortion similiar to above: Free-enterprise's superiority
> over eastern-bloc socialism does not mean modern capitalism is unassailable
> and above critical rethinking. It is a false relation used to control the
> dialogue: "Free-enterprise" means exactly AND only "modern capitalism".
What does free enterprise mean to you if not capitalism?
> > > dmb concludes:
> > > So what's my point? Don't be discouraged. Platt SEEMS to have NOT read
> > > everything he's read. But others are not only reading and
> > > comprehending, but also enjoying what you write.
> >
> > Platt concludes:
> > DMB has read Lila, but ignores what doesn't fit his socialist agenda. He
> > is impervious to logic and facts. Evidence above supports.
> Again, pure dichotomy. Everything that challenges "modern capitalism" is a
> "socialist agenda". It is using the dialogue to assert that these are the
> only two possible choices. It promotes fear by fending off any critical
> analysis of modern capitalistic practices by advancing the notion of the
> "socialist boogeyman" coming and taking away our freedoms.
Are you afraid of socialism? Many who contribute to this site are not,
especially our European friends. In fact, many like DMB defend socialism
on the grounds, as Pirsig says, it is guided by intellect. If I'm
promoting fear I fail to detect it here. I do promote freedom. If that
scares you, I'm sorry.
> As for evidence to your other "no evidence assertations", I state again
> that since the very first post I made (regarding Marx and Pirsig and
> alienation) I stated quite cleary that I favor "free markets"
More accurate I think to say, "I favor free markets, BUT . . ." Right?
> and a
> "bottom-up rethinking of capitalism" through changing the dialogue to
> remove the value-free "money over everything" attitude of modern
> capitalism.
Your assertion that capitalism is value-free is contradicted by Pirsig who
says capitalism (free enterprise) allows for Dynamic Quality.
> Despite several restatements of this, including several
> relations to Quality as presented in ZMM, each reply presented a view that
> my "beliefs" favored "coersion of honest traders",
You have yet to show how you would change capitalism, which you've made
obvious you'd like to do, without legal action.
> "earning money isn't
> good",
Again, more accurate I think to say, "Earning money is good, BUT . . ."
Right?
> and ongoing references equating my position with eastern-bloc
> socialism.
Show me where I ever equated your position with "eastern-bloc socialism."
Neither I nor Pirsig have made a distinction between plain old socialism
and "eastern-bloc socialism."
As for your dislike of dichotomies, need I remind you that logical
exposition and argument are based on the dichotomy of A and not A? In many
respects, it's indeed a dualistic world. Like life and death.
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 : Mon Jul 12 2004 - 14:09:39 BST