[MD] Where have all the values gone?

[Arlo J. Bensinger]

Greetings, Platt.

Just sippin' my morning coffee when your post came through, hence the near
immediate response. :-)

You had said, "Profits make possible quality things."

I think I get the jist of your reply, I was just hoping to examine "profit" a
little closer. 

[Platt]
Celebrity a form of "profit?" Now there's a quaint idea. Anyway, books are made
of paper which comes from trees which come from forests. No easy job to go into
those forests, cut down those trees, transport them to the mill, grind them up
into pulp, and then make paper. Now you can force people to do such work, or
you can motivate them. Which do you think is the more moral? Or, have I missed
your point?

[Arlo]
I think you missed my point. What "motivates them", those who go into the
forest, cut down the trees, etc? This was my basic question. Is it simply
"material profit", meaning "money, objects, etc."

Or, could "symbolic profit" (what you refer to as celebrity), meaning "social
recognition, esteem, cultural admiration, etc" be a possible motivator to do
work? You seem to suggest your answer is "no", is that right? So you'd say that
no one (or very few) engages in labor for social praise, esteem among the
community or cultural admiration?

I've also suggested a third form of profit, I call it "personal"...

[Arlo previously]
Now let's consider a possible third form of "profit", and call that "personal".
This form of profit would consist of internal satisfaction, fulfillment and
self-worth.

Does that form of profit underscore any work activity? Does that "make possible
Pirsig's books" (potentially)? Or are you suggesting that only (or primarily)
material or physical profit (renumeration, money, things) are responsible for
Quality things when you say "Profit makes possible quality things".

[Platt]
I'm saying that it's better to produce books and run the publishing business
using voluntary rather than slave labor. The media by which Pirsig's ideas get
transmitted beyond a small circle of conversationalists requires thought and
labor. Better for everyone if that thought and labor is motivated by the
carrots of profit rather than sticks of force. I'm sure you agree.

[Arlo]
I agree, but I think you missed the point of my question. Is "voluntary
motivation" to do "thought and labor" ever guided by symbolic or personal (self
worth, internal fulfillment) profit? How do these compare to material profit?

To restate, do people voluntarily engage in "thought in labor" primarily (or
perhaps even exclusively) for material profit; money, homes, cars, stuff. Or,
do people voluntary engage in "thought and labor" for what I suggest are
"symbolic" or "personal" profit?

Or simply, do you use "profit" as a synonym for "money", and reject other forms
of profit such as I've suggested?

[Platt]
Perhaps I sould revise and extend my remarks to say, "Profits or coercion make
possible quality things. Which would do you consider more moral?"

[Arlo]
Again, is material profit (money) the only alternative to coercion? (Or, perhaps
the most significant alternative?)

And look, so as not to get mired down in rhetoric, I'll say again that of course
I realize that in a money economy people need money to survive. So, its
fruitless for me to suggest that in the current state of culture, no one "works
for money". Of course they do. What I'm wondering is, in the greater scheme of
things, is "material profit" really "what makes possible quality things" such
as "Pirsig's books". Or are people movitated to engage in "thought and labor"
by other, perhaps equally as powerful, pursuits, such as symbolic (social
recognition) or personal (self-fulfillment) forms of profit?


Arlo