From: David Morey (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Mon Jul 12 2004 - 18:58:32 BST
Hi Paul
That is good stuff as usual. But would
you say that anything is fundamental to
the MOQ? In a way Quality, DQ/SQ
is I guess, but this is only one possible
cut of reality I guess, it has a certain
advantage over the subject-object cut,
but there could be other useful cuts, say
between current experience and remembered
experience -which would tell us certain things about
experience but not as much as SQ/DQ.
Would you agree with this?
regards
David M
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Turner" <paul@turnerbc.co.uk>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 9:19 AM
Subject: RE: MD the metaphysics of self-interest
> Hi Platt
>
> Platt said:
> Your distinction between "real but not fundamental" is fuzzy to me. Are
> there no "real" stones as in the famous passage from Boswell's "Life of
> (Samuel) Johnson?
>
> Paul:
> Johnson's stone-kicking refutes idealism, not the MOQ. What I mean by
> "real but not fundamental" is that whilst there are no subjects or
> objects without experience, there is experience without subjects and
> objects. Therefore, if the subjective self is neither essential to nor
> ubiquitous in experience it cannot be considered fundamental - but, this
> experience also supports the belief that the self is not necessarily
> unreal. Likewise, static patterns are not fundamental, but the MOQ does
> not deny that they are real.
>
> Paul previously said:
> > Second, given the above, I think the MOQ defines "little self" as
> static
> > patterns from all levels and "self-interest" as static
> biological-social
> > quality - i.e. biological pleasure and satisfaction mixed with a
> > preoccupation with social status, ego and wealth.
>
> Platt said:
> It will take some doing to convince me that intellectuals aren't as
> self-absorbed as anybody else, if that's your point.
>
> Paul:
> No, that's not my point. You seem to have misunderstood me because you
> misunderstand the MOQ's terminology. When you say, "intellectuals," you
> are using the word as a noun. In the MOQ, "intellectual" is used as an
> adjective to describe a category of static quality. "An intellectual,"
> like anyone else, is composed of static patterns from all levels.
>
> My point is this - that which motivates *anyone* to be self-absorbed
> with reputation, wealth, ego, status etc. is static social quality.
>
> Platt said:
> Self-interest propels all behavior don't you think, whether employees
> (including PhD's), CEOs, or independent contractors?
>
> Paul:
> No. I am arguing that self-interest is *biological-social* behaviour,
> not intellectual or Dynamic, and therefore doesn't propel all behaviour.
> If a PhD is behaving with self-interest, then that is biological-social
> behaviour.
>
> > Paul previously said:
> > As above, I think it is a completely real motivating force that fits
> > neatly into the biological and social levels of evolution.
>
> Platt said:
> And not intellectual? I don't think many PhD's would qualify as Mother
> Teresas.
>
> Paul:
> See above, this is irrelevant.
>
> Platt said:
> Where does the MOQ say or imply that intellectual patterns offer freedom
> from self-interest?
>
> Paul:
> It is a logical argument. Pirsig says this about social quality:
>
> "Social quality measurements....are such things as conformity to social
> custom, popularity, ego satisfaction, and 'reputation'." [Pirsig, MOQ
> Textbook]
>
> and
>
> "Fame and fortune are huge Dynamic parameters that give society its
> shape and meaning." [Lila, Ch.20]
>
> I argue that this is self-interest. Then, I apply the basic MOQ
> principle that each level of evolution moves away from, controls, and is
> often in opposition to, the "quality" that defines the previous level -
> therefore providing freedom from that quality. Lila is filled with
> examples of this and I'm sure you are familiar with them.
>
> Of course, if you disagree with the premises of my argument then you
> will disagree with my conclusion.
>
> Platt said:
> According to Joseph Campbell, early man had all sorts of taboos against
> "eating, killing or screwing anything we desired." Social taboos are
> more "human nature" than the activities you describe.
>
> Paul:
> Any "taboo" you can think of is a social pattern, which was my point -
> static social quality has largely succeeded in controlling biological
> impulses. Your argument that it is incorrect to say that biological
> patterns are human nature is the same as my argument that it is
> incorrect to say that self-interest is human nature - it doesn't include
> the whole picture
>
> (Also, I'm surprised that you seem to be defending man's "basic good
> nature" as you are normally so keen to point out how this is a
> "devastating fiction.")
>
> Paul previously said:
> > Society
> > has largely succeeded in controlling these biological impulses but it
> seems
> > clear to me that intellect has not yet managed to control man's
> obsession
> > with social quality.
>
> Platt said:
> Seems to me Western society is still at war with biological impulses
> called "terrorism" sanctioned by radical Islam society.
>
> Paul:
> I think it's a little more complicated than the social patterns of US
> media would have you believe, but I don't want to introduce it into this
> thread - although I think self-interest is something the current Western
> leaders know a lot about, and intellect has evidently taken a back seat.
> Before you start - No, I don't condone terrorism, or more generally, I
> don't condone blowing up innocent people.
>
> Cheers
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> 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
>
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 - 22:32:35 BST