RE: MD Two theories of truth

From: Paul Turner (paulj.turner@ntlworld.com)
Date: Thu Nov 13 2003 - 10:35:24 GMT

  • Next message: MATTHEW PAUL KUNDERT: "Re: MD Two theories of truth"

    Hi Matt, Johnny

    Matt:
    ...pragmatists would agree that morality, Quality, and intersubjective
    agreement are more or less interchangeable...

    Paul:
    I think intersubjective agreement has to be classified as static social
    patterns of authority and the static intellectual patterns they approve.
    Therefore, as Quality (or morality) *creates* static patterns (including
    intersubjective agreement), I don't think they are interchangeable. In
    addition, to borrow some words from Pirsig - when an American Indian
    goes into isolation and fasts in order to achieve a vision, the vision
    he seeks is not one of intersubjective agreement.

    Matt:
    One of the ways I can put my insouciance towards respecting
    Morality-as-such is to pick up one of Andy's lines of criticism: that
    Johnny is divinizing Morality/Quality. The analogous problem from
    theology is the problem of evil. If God is all-powerful, then why does
    he allow evil? Well, if everything emanates from Morality, if
    everything is Quality, how do we explain the presence of immorality?
    Because we don't respect Morality? But everything is Morality, even the
    bad stuff. Does that mean we should respect the bad stuff and the good
    stuff?

    Paul:
    Pirsig's redescription of morality in evolutionary terms provides an
    explanation for the presence of immorality and good and evil.

    "The static patterns that hold one level of organization together are
    often the same
    patterns that another level of organization must fight to maintain its
    own existence.
    Morality is not a simple set of rules. It's a very complex struggle of
    conflicting patterns of
    values. This conflict is the residue of evolution. As new patterns
    evolve they come into
    conflict with old ones. Each stage of evolution creates in its wake a
    wash of problems." [Lila p.188]

    "Is society good or is society evil? The question is confused because
    the term "society" is common to both these levels, but in one level
    society is the higher evolutionary pattern and in the other it is the
    lower. Unless you separate these two levels of moral codes you get a
    paralyzing confusion as to whether society is moral or immoral. That
    paralyzing
    confusion is what dominates all thoughts about morality and society
    today." [Lila p.352]

    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



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 13 2003 - 10:35:46 GMT