John, I do share your sense of discouragement about the quality of some of
the dialog here. But it is far better than what is happening in Washington
right now. A close advisor to Pres. Bush, Karen Hughes, has asserted that
the 'terrorists' (as if that word sums them up fully), are out to destroy
the 'American way of life', this, IMO, despite every primary source on Bin
Laden suggesting other wise. So Bush will ignore all the causes of
'terrorism' and engage in actions that bear little relevancy to the problem
with which we are presented, and risk only aggravating them. Likely then are
even greater terrorist actions, and subsequent escalation of US
(wrong-headed) actions -- a spiral of anger and killing akin to what has
happened elsewhere in the world. That is Washington. Fora like MOQ still
remain our among best hopes for thinking our way through to better
understandings and strategies...
Lawrence
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk
> [mailto:owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk]On Behalf Of John Beasley
> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 7:46 AM
> To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> Subject: Re: MD Four theses
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> Having been laid low with a nasty cold, and having my computer
> out of order
> as well, I have just struggled through a mountain of the last
> week's debate.
> I emerge saddened, not much wiser, but not entirely devastated.
>
> Sam, I found your four theses a great blend of intellect and morality. You
> said in your opening words "If the MOQ stands for anything it is for the
> value of the truth - a system which is open to the truth and the
> reality of
> the situation is one that is of higher quality than one which is not." I
> sense this concern has underlaid your continued contributions,
> and I cannot
> endorse it too highly.
>
> I have found myself very supportive of some people I have not
> always agreed
> with in the past. Marco, I appreciated your "I am an American"
> post of 16.9,
> and Rasheed, I found myself in unexpected agreement with some of
> your posts,
> particularly the extended one from Tamim. Horse wrote with
> justice "I would
> doubt that anyone on this list would be so stupid or callous as
> to say that
> the U.S. deserved to be attacked or that the thousands of lives
> lost in the
> WTC atrocity can be justified." He went on, with equal justice,
> to show, as
> did many others, that the US has been far from blameless in its own use of
> force. The same can be said of my own country, Australia, which
> shares with
> the US a deplorable history amounting to genocide against our own native
> peoples, and each has played dirty with neighbouring countries. And Tanya,
> thank you for sharing Auden's poem, which seemed to me to speak
> at a deeper
> level to the events of last week.
>
> My sadness arose from the responses of Platt and Roger, not just initial
> outpourings understandable in the circumstances, but maintained
> and defended
> in increasingly vehement and accusing ways. I have enjoyed my
> differences of
> opinion with both in the past, and saw them as 'elder statesmen' of the
> forum. I have visited America, have relatives there, and have good friends
> from there. I do not hate America. I celebrate those aspects of
> the US which
> are indeed admirable. But my concern in this forum is with two things; the
> first, as Sam indicated above, is the truth as I see it. The second is the
> exploration of Pirsig's thoughts on quality, and how quality
> might shape our
> perception of truth.
>
> Platt says "it is clear that the MOQ considers attacks against
> society such
> as occurred in the U.S. this week to be rooted in biological
> values designed
> to undercut and destroy social values." Perhaps I am just a little dense,
> but it is by no means clear that such attacks are biological. Indeed, my
> understanding of 'biological' would rule this out. The attacks appear
> ideological, which is a very different, and much more an intellectual,
> level. But Squonk (and Wim) have already said that. And Marco has
> pulled you
> up on your misquoting of the "Intellect has a defect in it" thread. But it
> was your latest statement on the environment that really floored me.
>
> You said "Since Pirsig says nothing about the environment per se, I
> hesitate to inject my views about it on this site. There are more pressing
> matters where the MOQ can be looked to for guidance."
>
> It was my privilege to organize a lecture in my home town only
> two weeks ago
> by Thom Hartmann, a US citizen, and author of "The Last Hours of Ancient
> Sunlight", in which he charts the likely future of a world in
> which the oil
> is running out. Since reading his book a year ago, I have found his thesis
> well supported in reputable enough journals such as 'New Scientist'. His
> lecture was polemical, and thought provoking, even if I have reservations
> about some of his conclusions. He is concerned that the world is
> entering a
> new feudalism, in which corporations are carving up markets with absolute
> indifference to the outcomes on us, their future serfs. I am not sure that
> he is right, but I must say I am less inclined to see protests against
> economic globalisation as some rat-bag, leftist conspiracy, since
> listening
> to him. I still see some aspects of globalisation as valuable, and tend to
> agree with him that it is the absence of deeper values in our consumer
> society that fuels our dis-ease. Part of any solution to our problems is
> surely a rediscovery of 'community', both locally, in meeting our basic
> needs for human contact and validation, and globally in terms of
> learning to
> plan for not just our immediate 'pursuit of happiness', but for
> the welfare
> of future generations. I agree totally with Paul when he says,
> "When I look
> at the people surrounding me, I don't see happiness. What I see is a
> misunderstanding of where happiness is."
>
> Hartmann, like Pirsig, is drawing lessons from the US Indians, in
> this case
> the Iroquois Nation and its enlightened constitution which contributed so
> much to the US Bill of Rights. I won't go on, except to say that
> to sustain
> a standard of living for all human beings on earth equivalent to
> a survival
> income in the US or Australia, is just not possible. The resources are
> finite and humanity keeps increasing inexorably. If Pirsig has nothing to
> say about this most urgent of issues, and we choose to ignore it, then we
> shall reap the whirlwind. As Derrick said, "America's power is great;
> attendent is great responsibility."
>
> So how to sum all this up. I feel like Pirsig as he walked out of
> the Hindu
> University in Benares. I just give up. All the talk about a Metaphysics of
> Quality has done nothing to improve our world, it seems, and does
> little to
> change our generally knee-jerk reactions to disasters such as we saw last
> week. I actually see the reactions in this forum as essentially religious,
> particularly from Platt and Roger, rather than any form of reason informed
> by value. Pirsig is his own best critic when in Ch 29 of ZMM he says that
> Phaedrus' attempt to create a new philosophy, a new spiritual
> rationality,
> was the wrong path. What we have exemplified in the US response
> to teror is
> "the evil of our technology, the tendency to do what is 'reasonable' even
> when it isn't any good." But what Pirsig eventually gave us was a
> metaphysics, and that ain't no better. It doesn't fix things either.
>
> I am not totally downcast. As Pirsig says "any further improvement of the
> world will be done ... by individuals making Quality decisions and that's
> all." (ZMM Ch 29) What we need is a better road map for educating
> ourselves,
> and others, to more rapidly ascertain the quality options that can inform
> our actions. After much thought, I doubt that the MOQ will help.
> Ken Wilber
> has his faults, but still offers a superior vantage point for charting our
> uncertain future. Pirsig, sadly, appeals to a sick machismo in all of us
> when he speaks of crushing germs. We only need to label Bin Laden or some
> ethnic or religious group as the germs, and we are back in the crusades.
> "Remember the cruelties".
>
> In a sense I endorse the attack on religion that was made by
> someone. It is
> the fundamentalists, of whatever ilk, armed with technology they
> could never
> have created, but can easily use or corrupt, who scare me. But the only
> solution to fundamentalism is education where possible, social
> justice and a
> fair share of life's goods where practicable, and firmness where
> necessary.
> As Wilber makes clear in his recent books, though, progression through the
> moral hierarchy cannot be short circuited. What must be done is to provide
> the support that allows each individual to move on, and not
> become stuck in
> a low level moral stance. Yet to do this actually entails valuing every
> level of the moral hierarchy, since none can be avoided. Each is grown
> through in each individual life journey. My hope is that education can
> facilitate this journey for each of us. The alternatives are grim.
>
> John B
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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
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 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:31 BST