Hi all,
>The topic of June is:
>
>Does the MOQ support Socrates when he says, "A man who has
>learned about right will be righteous."?
>
>Will anyone knowingly do wrong if he or she knows it's wrong?
>Or in MoQ terms: Will a person (or a society, or a molecule) knowingly 
>choose a low Quality action over a high Quality action?
  Two sides of our questions present themselves here. One is analyzing 
Knowledge & Moral Action, the other deals with Will & Moral Action.
  Looking for the foundations of any high-quality position, I would first 
suggest that the question of free will in relation to the MOQ be worked out. 
Pirsig says that a person is free to the extent he follows Dynamic Quality, 
but determined to the extent that static patterns of value control his 
actions. This, and many other passages, unequivocably indicate an implied 
"Self" which is distinct both from DQ & sq. It seems to me at the time being 
that this Self is that which is Experience -- OF more or less, better or 
worse DQ or sq.
However, in my mind this one is still wide open...
  After playing with the idea of a Self & Free Will, I am led to try and 
connect with two other ideas:
i)  Quality has you, nothing dominates Quality
ii)  "B" values precondition "A"
  What effect do these concepts have on the metaphysical framework of our 
questions on righteous action? Surely any highquality answer to Socrates' 
riddle must take into account and rest comfortably within these principles - 
and those of radical empiricism, pragmatism, mysticism - or else take a 
second look in the mirror. I won't do that here or now. I hope someone else, 
might, though.
  One final important building block in a coherent response to this question 
is composed of the "morality" of Zen Buddhism. Dharma, "righteousness" in 
one sense, and the state of Bodhi(enlightenment), which is "in/of" 
nirvana/dharmakaya, are tightly linked. However, to the best of my 
knowledge, there is little doubt that the absolute final Comprehension and 
Continuous Expression of the Way things are
does NOT consist in a sense of value. By all means possible, Zen masters 
seem to teach through paradox and spontaneity that the conceptual 
distinctions between such things as "subjects" and "objects", light and 
dark, existence and non-existence, and - even Value - good or bad, are 
ultimately illusory and a product/symptom of wrong-thinking, of the endless 
ride on the wheel of samsara.
  This samsaric wheel of Dharma (for in Zen, as in Advaita Vedanta, there is 
no distinction between samsara/nirvana, maya/brahma - distinctions are just 
nasty little static annoyances) is run, quite literally, by the laws of 
karma. There is an emphasis in the first stages of buddhism on creating a 
positive, as opposed to negative (dukkha) state of mind, through which 
compassion easily and spontaneously, Always manifests itself. Love your 
neighbour - and twice again. Good karma, bad karma. But remember - Huang Po 
tells me that even the desire or concept of "good karma" must be discarded 
in order to be Buddha. All the while keeping "in mind" that you ARE the 
buddha, and there is no enlightenment which need take place, no ignorance 
which has ever clouded your vision.)
  Here, perhaps, we may allude to "righteousness" and link ideas between the 
MOQ and buddhism. But if Zen is to be (and doesn't necessarily have to be) 
our primary religious datum and guide for the practice of motorcycle 
maintenance, relationships, and all the mythic rest, then we may not speak a 
whit about "what is good, and what is not good". "Need we anyone to tell us 
these things, Phaedrus?". Well, according to Zen, No. It has been described 
as "direct transmission outside of scriptures, free from words or letters, 
direct pointing to the soul of man..."
  Let's not forget, that until someone shows better otherwise, the MOQ 
states clearly that there is no "I", nothing, at the primary empirical 
leading edge of reality. Just - somehow - unmediated, undivided, 
undifferentiated, aesthetically continuous Experience. This must be kept in 
mind when considering the ramifications of different possible/preferential 
positions on this matter of Knowledge and Free Will, and the conceptual term 
"righteousness".
Wishing you Will Well
Rich
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 17 2002 - 13:08:45 GMT