Re: MD The Eudaimonic MoQ

From: Scott R (jse885@spinn.net)
Date: Wed May 28 2003 - 02:34:10 BST

  • Next message: nic nott: "MD quality-man made or natural?"

    Steve, et al,

    > Sam said:
    > >Would you
    > > deny that Spock is an outstanding example of an intellectually dominated
    > > person, as defined in the
    > > standard account?
    >
    > Steve says:
    >
    > I assume you brought Spock into this because you think that (a) Spock is
    the
    > epitome of an intellectually dominated person and (b) the MOQ says that it
    > is best to be intellectually dominated, which would suggest a problem with
    > the description of the intellectual level because none of us think that
    > Spock is the ideal person.
    >

    In fact, in the TV shows, Spock was a caricature of an intellectually
    dominated person, not an epitome, but nevermind.

    [Steve]> I don't think that what is best is to be dominated by intellect.
    Pirsig
    > says what is best is to be free of all static patterns which is often
    > interpreted to mean some sort of enlightenment. I think it may also be
    read
    > to mean having everything in balance.

    I disagree, though I would phrase it differently. Not as, one's self being
    "dominated by intellect" (since this assumes there is a self to be
    dominated). But I read the MoQ as saying that the intellect should dominate
    the social (and biological and inorganic). But this is a long-term project,
    not realizable until the Rigel's and Lila's disappear, that is, when they
    learn the value
    of intellect, which requires detachment. Rigel and Phaedrus have trouble
    communicating because Rigel expects Phaedrus to experience the same outrage
    over Lila's social sins that Rigel does. But Phaedrus is able to step back
    and consider.

    In other words, I see the social as disappearing except when whatever social
    system exists causes some problem, and then the intellect must fix it. Just
    as now, the biological has disappeared except when we get sick. Of course,
    they are and will always still be there, but the goal should be that they
    take up as little of our attention as possible. But, as I say, this is
    long-term, like in centuries.

    As for feeling socially awkward, I see that as going with the territory (I'm
    also a social moron, fortunately now getting old enough that I don't care as
    much). The solution, I suspect, is monastic, as Pirsig suggests in ch. 30
    ("putting static patterns to sleep"). (Hermitages appear attractive, but
    unless you're willing to live on roadkill, like the guy in Hiassen's novels,
    not very practical. Also, a monastery would provide a better laboratory for
    learning how to make the social disappear.)

    - Scott

    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 : Wed May 28 2003 - 02:37:58 BST