Re: MD Individuality

From: Elizaphanian (Elizaphanian@members.v21.co.uk)
Date: Sat Nov 23 2002 - 18:40:30 GMT

  • Next message: Elizaphanian: "Re: MD Can Only Humans Respond to DQ?"

    Hi David,

    You haven't understood my point on this one.

    > DMB says:
    > Murdering a human being is wrong on many levels and certainly not JUST
    > because intellectual values are destroyed. You seem to construe the MOQ to
    > say that the loss of intellectual values is the only thing that matters to
    > Pirsig, as if its no problem to destroy biological and social patterns.
    > Putting intellect at the top and insisting that its the most valuable
    thing
    > is not the same as saying everything else is worthless. So I think its not
    > accurate to depict this "logical implication" as barbaric.

    Whereas what I said (from your quotation of my words, no less!) was:

    > The 9/11 example is just particularly graphic and (on one level!) very
    easy
    > to understand what happened. But in fact any disaster could qualify. My
    > point is that Pirsig gives a scale of values, that 'intellectual' values
    are
    > the top of the heap, and therefore the 'worst' thing about any disaster
    (ie
    > worst that we can talk about, so not including unquantifiable DQ) is the
    > loss of intellectual goods. Which I think is barbaric.

    So, I *don't* claim that 'the loss of intellectual values is the only thing
    that matters' - I precisely claim that "the 'worst' thing about any
    disaster... is the loss of intellectual goods". I think there is a
    difference between saying something is the 'worst' and saying that something
    is the 'only' loss. So I shall repeat my question: "Are you saying that it
    isn't a logical implication of the MoQ, or that it isn't barbaric?"

    [The other points in the post can be best pursued in the 'Sophocles' bit, as
    they centre on truth, where I've just sent another post. I am *definitely*
    claiming that reason is incapable of choice, and that therefore reason
    (understood narrowly, not broadly) cannot distinguish a bad idea from a good
    one, cannot create a hypothesis and provides no motive for the search for
    truth and meaning. That draws the dividing line pretty clearly, doesn't
    it!!! :-) ]

    Cheers!
    Sam
    www.elizaphanian.v-2-1.net/home.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 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 23 2002 - 18:36:57 GMT