Re: LS A Dynamic Morality of Power

From: Carmen Flynn (theflynn@dynamo.com.ar)
Date: Thu Apr 01 1999 - 03:20:27 BST


[Note to the owner/ administrator: I will not feel offended if you choose not
to pass this on to the LS group. My purpose was to get all this trends of
thoughts out of my head, and I have.]

Dear LS,

5) [David L Thomas]
H.N.Brailsford has said "the crude issue of power... is always the
last of the realities that sensitive and reasonable men can bring
themselves to face".
What, if anything, does the Metaphysics of Quality have to say about
the realities of power.
[David L Thomas]
[Boone Bradley]
[Kevin Sanchez]
[Glen Dickey]
[Horse]

Note: When reading my contribution to this month topic please stick with me to
the end of my note because at first it might look like is not related to the
first two e-mails ( Horse's & Kevins) , but it will lead to it.] Just be
patient, I have been thinking about it very hard.

My thoughts move around:
1.- Chapter 24, which starts with the question : Does Lila have quality, pages
347-365 R.M.Pirsig Lila Ch 24. You might need to have re-read the chapter or
keep it handy for reference.

2.- What are the MOQ basic elements(Last month topic was a good exercise, but
we left something out(*)), How does the process work, and Why in the world do I
need to bother .[(as someone might say : "I am just fine leave me alone with my
life and stop all that strange-at times patronizing language, besides I am very
busy and I can hardly keep up floating ...'").]

3.-"What, if anything, does the Metaphysics of Quality have to say about
the realities of power."... At first I couldn't put my finger on it, but know
now, this is what I have to say:

    The realities of power is a very important element within the MOQ
framework. It is so central to it that 'The reality of power' is inter bedded
at each and every level of the MOQ hierarchy.

Let me explain myself with a metaphor. Think of reality to be represented by a
TRAIN. The parts of the train are divided in five compartments. Each
compartment in part holds:
                First one: full of static inorganic patterns
                Second one: full of static Biological patterns
                Third one: same but Social patterns
                Forth one: same but Intellectual patterns
The fifth compartment houses the 'engine' that moves the train forward in its
track. That 'engine' is the POWER that moves the whole train. Without that
power, the train does not move, it cannot be re-fueled and if that train is
unable to move, the whole train will stay put and without movement the train
will rust away in the middle of nowhere and will just become part of the
inorganic reality of the universe.
Where is this train going or moving to?: Towards Dynamic Quality.
Why does the train needs to move?: Because the foundations where it stands
keeps changing and if the train doesn't react with enough time to make the
necessary changes needed to keep functioning, it will move down to static
inorganic matter. The resources around that train are limited and are in need
of constant replacement.
At each level 'Power' has been exercise in order to keep the control necessary
to maintain the whole system alive and moving.

One of Kevin's questions is:
                                            Is knowledge power?
An answer to that could be found on CH. 24 Lila., page 350: " The fundamental
purpose of knowledge is to Dynamically improve and preserve society.' Exchange
the word knowledge for power in this quotation.
                Power/Knowledge puts the 'object' (cells, animals, societies)
in a position to preserve
                or improve their situation. (Same page 350).
At the lower levels (i.e. biological) one could argue that the 'object' (cells,
atoms) using the power uses it by obeying pure survival instincts. i.e. the
way a virus reproduces itself, or the way the Carbon atom behaves to combine
with other elements.
In the medium levels (i.e. Social) the object (gender, race, religion) using
the 'power' might or it might not be aware of the level of
destruction/construction that its actions have over the rest of their/its
environment. A good example here will be the power exercised by European
settlers over the Native people of the Americas.
At higher levels (i.e. Intellectual) an 'object' (a scientist, parent,
corporation) using or exercising power would move to a higher level of Dynamic
Quality 'if' and 'only if' that power is used without the destruction of the
static patterns they are trying to improve/replace.(see page 350 LILA). Objects
evolve (Change) because their environment also changes. The way an object
chooses to adapt to those environmental changes and the tools it uses in the
struggle to survive, will determine the level of Quality that object will
reach.

To close, I will add that all objects using 'power' might not be aware that
their actions are leading them to the opposite end from their original purpose,
that is, their action will lead to their own destruction. These 'objects' are
unable or unwilling to rise to higher levels and 'see or understand' the larger
picture.
Finally 'Power' is one mean to achieve dynamic quality, not the ultimate 'end'
itself.
And, to add to Kevin's Theory of Power:
[Kevin wrote:
"
In summation,
Principle One - POWER = VALUE.
Principle Two - When value is statically divided, oppression triumphs.
Principle Three - When value is dynamically united, freedom triumphs."]

To that I will like to add:

Principle Four- "Freedom doesn't have to be obtained by the destruction
                            of the static patterns themselves". RMP Ch 24. page
351

* Let's assume that we did get to the basic elements of the MOQ on last month
discussion, How does a person uses this powerful tool? The know-how is
paramount. What use is there for a 'tool' if once you have it you don't know
how to use it? Better yet, When or how do you know if you are using the tool
right or wrong for good or bad? how does one knows?

Hasta la vista,
Carmencita.

Kevin Sanchez wrote:

> Dear Lila Squad:
>
> I. Foucault's Theory of Power
>
> In light of our discourse about "the realities of power," I have a
> preliminary question to ask:
>
> Is knowledge power?
>
> The French postmodern, Michel Foucault, would answer yes. He says that
> knowledge is used to further the interests of the powerful and constitutes
> a power in itself. Intellectuals work with the oppressive forces of society
> or attempt to oppressive others. In Pirsig's terminology, intellectuals
> either support the domination of the social level of static quality or
> uphold the domination of the intellectual level. To Foucault, either
> remains oppressive. Is knowledge used only to gain power over others?
>
> My initial response was no; the intellectual level is not just another
> instrument of the social level. That seems absurd. How could one individual
> named Copernicus change society if he only wished to increase his power? He
> put himself at great social risk and still attacked society - he didn't
> uphold it.
>
> II. Kevin's Theory of Power
>
> But there is another possibility which I haven't fully considered. My
> suggested equations are:
> Oppressive Power = Static Quality
> Liberating Power = Dynamic Quality
>
> Since valuing a thing as better automatically devalues other things, in
> doing so, does the concept of betterment justify a power-relationship? Does
> not the high quality oppress the low quality?
>
> Then a hypothesis came to mind: perhaps the higher one goes up the latter
> of static quality, the less oppressive, until one reaches Dynamic Quality
> where no oppression exists at all. On the social level, the oppression is
> quite severe - the socially accepted destroy the social outcasts, the
> strong kill the weak. On the intellectual level, the opression is less
> severe, ignorance is killed through education.
>
> But on the Dynamic level, no oppression occurs because "things" as such
> don't exist. The Dynamic level unites both subject and object and in my
> view Dynamic Quality is the same as the Union of All Things. Nothing can be
> oppressed when nothing exists separately from anything else. This also
> means there is no betterment, or rather, a state of perfection has been
> reached.
>
> The moral the Metaphysics of Quality can subscribe to "the realities of
> power" is this: the more Dynamic the subject(s) become(s), the less
> entrenched in power-relationship and the less oppressive. We ought to
> constantly strive for Dynamic Quality - a state of unified power and
> absolute freedom.
>
> In summation,
> Principle One - POWER = VALUE.
> Principle Two - When value is statically divided, oppression triumphs.
> Principle Three - When value is dynamically united, freedom triumphs.
>
> I can hardly think of a less oppressive person that a mystic during yoga
> meditation.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Kev
>
> MOQ Online - http://www.moq.org

MOQ Online - http://www.moq.org



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 17 2002 - 13:08:40 GMT