From: Kevin (kevin@xap.com)
Date: Mon Feb 03 2003 - 19:27:58 GMT
DMB quotes Pirsig:
The idea that satisfaction alone is the test of anything is very
dangerous, according to the MOQ. There are different kinds of
satisfaction and some of them are moral nightmres. The Holocaust
produced a satisfaction among Nazis. That was quality for them. They
considered it to be practical. But it was a quality dictated by low
level static social and biological patterns whose overall purpose was to
retard the evolution of truth and DQ. James would probably have been
horrified to find that Nazis could use his pragmatism just as freely as
anyone else, but Phaedrus didn't see anything that would prevent it. But
he thought that the MOQ's classification of static patterns of good
prevents this kind of debasement.
Kevin:
So Pirsig feels the MOQ is highly hijack resistant, but plain old
pragmatism isn't.
To test this idea I suggest we find ourselves a neo-Nazi (or an old
fashioned one) and give them a copy of ZMM & Lila. After a careful
reading of both, our Nazi will be converted to Good (i.e. something
other than Nazism)?
Matt spoke on behalf of pragmatism in general (and Rorty in particular):
What Pirsig thinks he's able to do is give us a proof-positive way of
never falling into Nazism. And I agree, if we all agree on how to
interpret the levels and it's done in a way that avoids Nazism, then
none of us will fall into Nazism. The problem is the Nazi. The Nazi
wouldn't distort the MOQ. He wouldn't think he was distorting the MOQ,
only we might. He would say that Pirsig had gotten wrong. Only we
might disagree. He would say that Jews are no better then animals and
that, as biological patterns, they should be eradicated to make room for
us blue-eyed intellectual-level people. Like a germ being killed in
favor of a patient. The Nazi will say, "Europe is sick. We must cure
it." Only we who already don't agree with Nazism will say that their
interpretation is wrong. The Nazis aren't distorting the MOQ, they're
interpreting it the same way we are: in the way that makes the most
sense to them.
Kevin:
This sounds like a much more reasonable expectation of our Nazi's
reaction to MOQ. They'll interpret it to suit their interests just as we
do.
So what prevents us from being Nazis? We do.
Platt finds the MOQ perfectly supports his conservatism.
DMB finds the MOQ perfectly supports his liberalism.
Several find the MOQ perfectly supports Christianity.
I find the MOQ perfectly supports my Atheism.
As I see it, this phenomenon results from key features of the MOQ.
1) rejection of objectivity
2) empowerment that each individual "knows" Quality "instinctively"
I guess you could say it's an epistemological problem with the MOQ.
Of course, I don't necessarily see this as a "problem" or weakness. It
just means the MOQ isn't the Ultimate Answer to Life, Universe and
Everything. It's a _method_ of inquiry, not the Terminus of Inquiry.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 Feb 03 2003 - 19:28:39 GMT