RE: MD Quality evil destruction contingency

From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Mon May 17 2004 - 01:32:31 BST

  • Next message: InfoPro Consulting: Mark Heyman: "Re: MD "biological" crime"

    David Morey posed for discussion:
    In the world of the MOQ, what is evil? Why is there destruction? What is the
    relationship between patterns and contingency?

    dmb says:
    I thought the other Dave's answer was pretty good. "All evil is contingent",
    it's "phase-specific", it's "assymetrical", as Dave S put it. Generally
    destruction is a natural part of the evolutionary process and is even a
    normal feature of everyday existence for those of us who eat. But then there
    is destruction of the evil sort. Beyond the most conspicuously evil acts
    like murder, genocide and all that bloody stuff, evil is "an unnecessary
    suppression of DQ", as DS said. In other words, its evil to stand in the way
    of evolution. This raises the question of how to know the difference between
    preservation of worthy sq and inappropriate clinging to it. How do we know
    the difference between positive change and social destruction?

    The case of the ZUNI Brujo is a meditation on those questions. (chapter 9)
    And this little morality koan leads Pirsig to make the static/Dynamic
    split. he explains that there was a deep "conflict between a priesthood anda
    shaman" and employes EA Hobel to describe the priesthood as "fixed in a firm
    set of traditions" and shamans as "arrant individualists" and "always a
    threat to the order of the organized church". Pirsig tells us that both
    sides proclaimed itself good and the other evil. And then he says...

    "As Phaedrus thought about this context again and again it became apparent
    there were two KINDS of good and evil involved.
     
    The tribal frame of values that condemned the BRUJO and led to his
    punishment was one kind of good, for which Phaedrus coined the terms 'static
    good'. Each culture has its own pattern of static good derived from fixed
    laws and the traditions and values that underlie them. This pattern of
    static good is the essential structure of he culture itself and defines it.
    In the static sense the BRUJO was very clearly evil to oppose the appointed
    authorities of his tribe. Suppose everyone did that? The whole Zuni culture,
    after thousands of years of continuous survival, would collapse into chaos.

    But in addition there's a DYNAMIC good that is outside of any culture, that
    cannot be contained by any system of precepts, but has to be continually
    rediscovered as a culture evolves. Good and evil are not ENTIRELY a matter
    of tribal custom. There has to be a source of good and evil outside the
    tribal custom that produces tribal change."

    I guess it'd be good to begin a discussion with the distinction between
    these "two kinds of good and evil" in mind.

    two cents,
    dmb

    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 : Mon May 17 2004 - 01:36:38 BST