Hi everyone
It's ~2 days before the end of the month, time to start voting on the
topic suggestions for next month. You may post your votes between now
and midnight GMT 29 February.
A couple of points:
Please use the same subject line as this post when you submit your vote.
Please vote for only one of the topics listed below.
1
In the event of an inter-level conflict is it ALWAYS the case that the
higher level of Value, as defined in the MOQ, has moral superiority? Are
there instances where this is not the case and how are they resolved? How is
it possible to recognize and/or resolve an intra-level moral conflict?
(Marco)
2
Is this static-dynamic split merely an epistemic convenience that we make
arbitrarily or is it an ontological reality, transcending our thoughts and
intellectual description of it?
(Marco)
3
What would our world look like today if the Sophists had won the debate
over the primacy of Truth over Quality?
(Marco)
4
I have been busy the past few months putting together a book called
'Lila's Child' which chronicles the first months of TLS discussion
group, from August 1997 to April 1998.
The manuscript is now nearing completion and I would like to invite the
focus group to critique 'Lila's Child' chapter by chapter. Specifically
I am looking for suggestions to improve the flow of dialogue and help in
finding any redundancies, misspelling and grammatical errors that I
might have missed.
(Dan Glover)
5
(Original author Philip Wigg)
'Lila' was described in one it's reviews as 'having little to add but more dull taxonomy'. Given
that trying to solve moral dilemmas using MOQ seems to create as much debate and
confusion as not using MOQ and there also seems to be considerable confusion as to the
interpretion of Pirsig's levels, is this a fair criticism?
(Horse)
6
(Original author Denis Poisson)
To further explore the Social and Intelectual Levels in terms of how they work and their
composition. Also, if DNA is the "machine code" or interface between the inorganic and the
biological levels, what form does the interface between the Biological and the Social levels
take and similarly the interface between the Social and the Intellectual levels.
(Horse)
7
(Original author Kevin Sanchez)
How would Pirsig unite modernity and postmodernity. Chomsky advocates modernity
claiming we need morality to legitimize our actions and justice is the highest ideal of
society. Foucault advocates postmodernity claiming that despite our need of it,
morality doesn't exists and that society defines its highest ideal as it wishes. It seems
Pirsig can't appease the moderns because of his reliance on experience instead of logic and
he can't appease the postmoderns because of his acceptance of a universal morality
instead of particular morality.
(Horse)
8
Can the MoQ be separated from LILA??? If so, how do we do it?
If not, how can this group ever really achieve anything more substantial
than literary criticism?
(Richard Budd)
9
Rather than pose a question, I'd like to focus on the original work by
simply re-reading it together, with fresh eyes.
And this proposal for March is designed as an experiment to see if we want
to cover the entire book together. If we decide to go ahead after one month
of experimentation, the entire re-reading project would take about a year.
Perhaps you saw the conversations about all this in the other forum? Anyway,
there are 36 chapters in Lila and 12 months in a year. Obviously, that works
out to 3 chapters per month.
So I propose that we experiment with this method for our March discussion.
We'll discuss the first three chapters. We'll work out the details as we go
along, but the main idea is to re-read big chunks of the book so that we can
see the context of all our favorite quotes and examples. We'll look at the
literary aspects to see how they enhance, support or clarify the ideas being
presented. All the while we are just asking one main question; What is
Pirsig saying? What does it mean?
I don't even recall what issues are covered in the first three chapters. And
it doesn't really matter. The idea is to go through the MOQ in the way
Pirsig intended, starting on page one and then page 2, etc. I think
simplicity is the greatest feature of this plan. Let's read it together and
listen carefully to the main man. Not to agree or disagree even, just to
really, really hear what he's saying. Lets get some pure Pirsig going. Let's
look again with fresh eyes. Let's look at Pirsig's words in their full
context. What do you say?
(David Buchanan)
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:18 BST