From: skutvik@online.no
Date: Fri Aug 05 2005 - 07:52:24 BST
Hi Arlo
3 Aug. you wrote:
> [Bo]
> > Religion (of the Semitic kind I must stress) is the chief social
> > denominator (according to Pirsig) while USA or any other Western
> > country is chiefly intellect-orientated. Again nothing to do with
> > intelligence.
> [Arlo]
> The folks who call the US of A a "christian nation" may disagree with
> you. So would the politicians and justicies who demand that the
> Occidental "10 Commandments" undergird our judicial system and should
> be represented at courthouses. And likely so would the people who cry
> heresy whenever anyone challenges the "one nation under God"
> catch-phrase.
There are of course a lot of religious sects and "societies" in USA
as there are in my country, that preaches the end of the world
due to sex and drugs and general decline, but USA is solidly
anchored in - what we in MOQ-speak call - intellectual value.
Social value's most prominent pattern - religion - is brought under
control and has become a personal "faith" not a political force
..thank God.
> Even Platt has argued that Judeo-Christian "morals" be upheld by law
> in this country... of course, to be fair, only a very selective few
> (e.g., to ban gays from marrying, but not to feed the hungry or
> shelter the homeless).
Well, intellect is "out of society", thus even an intellect-dominated
state will have laws that can be traced back to their social origin.
To steal, murder and lie can never become a virtue in any
context, while coveting another man's ox and wife obviously
belongs to a certain age and condition. The point is that intellect's
own morals have overlaid the social ones. Stealing is still illegal
but no one is allowed to cut off hands etc. Regarding "gays" it
was such a taboo in ancient times that "God" didn't even bother
to ban it. ;-)
> Let me ask you this, according to Pirsig, much (if not most) of our
> "freedoms" come from Indian culture, not European culture. Would you
> say then that someone who self-describes as a Sioux, or Lenape, would
> also be "intellect-oriented"?
I have never really understood the "Indian aspect" of the MOQ.
The freedom of a nomadic culture has little to do with the
intellectual patterns that Pirsig lists in LILA, so in my opinion the
intellectual level weren't part of the Sioux make-up. An aside
here. How can "freedom" have anything to do with intellect if it is
"manipulation of symbols"? It all points to my defined as the
subject/object distinction.
> And, I'm also curious where you would place Japan and Mexico on your
> scale. Do they align with what you call "the West"?
Japan and the Far East (sorry Khoo I just mean in the same
sense that I am from the Far North) is another story. As I
understand LILA's Rt. section the Orientals has transcended SOM
or intellect and reached some Quality-like "level" represented by
Buddhism - the Zen kind preferably.
Mexico? Hmm. Originally that region as Maya or Aztec were
social focussed, all world were. Now as a modern secular state
with religion harnessed it is definitely intellect-dominated ... but
there are grades. If you now are to ask about Outer Mongolia ..;-)
Bo
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 : Fri Aug 05 2005 - 07:57:51 BST