Ant McWatt (ant11@liverpool.ac.uk)
Sat, 29 Aug 1998 04:53:58 +0100
On Thu, 27 Aug 1998 23:37:07 -0500 "Donald S. Rosenow"
<donangel@netusa1.net> wrote:
>
> Ant McWatt wrote:
>
> "Re-examining your marriage example, Theo, I was reminded of Richard
> Rigel. Maybe your belief that "Pirsig's grasp of morality is, at least
> a little,suspect" is based on some on some implicit or explicit
> Victorian moral codes?
>
> "I still can't agree with your idea that a marriage is purely static,
> either. I'm sure that sound wrong. Or if you are not saying this, then
> in which way is marriage
> Dynamic which adultery is not?"
>
> Marriage, and it is important to remember that the form of the marriage
> is less important than the function, is a social control of biology, and
> is therefore more moral than promiscuity. It is a contract with one's
> spouse and with society. Adultery is a breach of that contract. Within
> the marriage, the relationship of husband to wife is rife with the
> possiblity of Dynamic Quality, not least because of the Static nature of
> the compact.
>
> Don
I like your reply here as it gives us both static and
Dynamic explanations of marriage.
Many thanks.
Ant.
-- homepage - http://www.moq.org/lilasquad unsubscribe/queries - mailto:lilasquad@moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:43:39 CEST