[MD] Where have all the values gone?

[Arlo J. Bensinger]

On Sat, 21 Jan 2006 06:31:41 +0000, "Platt Holden" wrote:
[Platt]
I fail to see the connection between profits and alcoholism unless you're 
saying there's something wrong with being obsessed about making money.

[Arlo]
Yes.

[Arlo previously, quoting Pirsig]
"Victorians in America, she explained, were nouveau riche who had no 
guidelines for what to do with all their sudden wealth and growth. What was 
depressing about them was their ugly gracelessness: the gracelessness of 
someone who has outgrown his own codes of self­regulation.They didn't know  how
to relate to money. That was the problem. ... No income taxes and no social
codes really forced a sharing of the wealth. After scrambling for their lives
to get it, they couldn't just give it away. And so the whole thing became
involuted."

[Platt]
I don't seem Bill Gates suffering from lack of guidelines on how to spend his
billions.

[Arlo]
You disagree with Pirsig's assessment? Or you think Bill Gates has recaptured
the "codes of self regulation" Pirsig feels the Victorians lacked?

[Platt]
As for gracelessness, take a look at grunge, the style of the young  today.
Victorians had a sense of grace and manners far surpassing the clods filling
the malls today.

[Arlo]
I'm not sure what your point is. Pirsig said of the Victorians, that what was
"depressing about them was their ugly gracelessness". Are you disagreeing?
About your "grace and manners", Pirsig says of the Victorians, "The Puritans
were never the gaudy, fraudulent, ornamental peacocks the Victorians were."

[Platt]
As I suggested, our culture provides more free time to pursue activity one 
cares about than any culture in history. 

[Arlo]
According to what measure? How would you say our culture provides more free time
than Icelandic culture? Danish? Canadian? Japanese? 

According to Hedrick Smith, "Working couples lost an average of 22 hours a week
of family and personal time between 1969 and 1999." And CNN has reported,
"statistics show that last year the average American worked 1978 hours -- up
from 1942 hours in 1990", saying that according to a study done by "The United
Nations' International Labor Organization (ILO), "Workers in the United States
are putting in more hours than anyone else in the industrialized world."

Fisher Vista's Management site contains the following report summaries.

Employees today spend an average of 44 hours per week working - six hours more
than they're scheduled to work. - Families Work Institute, 1998

Eighty eight percent of employees say they have a hard time juggling work and
life. Aon Consulting, 2000

Many workers also say they have to work very fast (68 percent) and very hard (88
percent). - Families Work Institute, 1998

One in three employees brings work home at least once a week, an increase of 10
percent over the past 20 years. - Families Work Institute, 1998

The number of employees who would like to work fewer hours rose 17 percentage
points over this time period. - Families Work Institute, 1998

Sixty- three percent of Americans want to work less, up from 46 percent in 1992.
- Families Work Institute, 1998

40% of employees work overtime or bring work home with them at least once a week
- Xylo Report, Shifts in Work and Home Life Boundaries 2000.


[Platt]
I never claimed material things were responsible for craftsmanship, just that
they made craftsmanship possible. I see no evidence that focusing on profit
kills craftsmanship.

[Arlo]
Pirsig did, at least he found that craftsmanship was being killed by
non-identification between those who produce and what they produce, and
similarly between those who consume and what they consume. I understand you
reticence to acknowledge Pirsig on this.

However, just to see if I understand, let me get back to your original
statement, and restate it. Tell me if you agree or disagree with this.

"The craftsman is driven to produce Quality things by a desire for material
profit." Would you say this is fairly true on a societal scale, in your
opinion?

What I'm getting is that, yes, I've acknowledge that money is necessary in a
money economy to secure basic materials. And that, yes, in a money economy a
business must show profit to stay operational. But what motivates people to
"produce Quality things" is not, in my opinion, a pursuit of wealth, but a
pursuit of Quality. Money may enable the process, as do screws, ink and
binder's glue. But the drive to produce Quality things is not driven by a need
to "earn money". It is driven by people pursuing DQ, in labor they identify
with, with artisic freedom to respond to that DQ as needed.

[Platt said of the Wally Compensation Equilibrium Project]
Why? Because the market determines whether Wally will make a profit or not. If
the product he makes doesn't sell because of his shoddy workmanship, he'll be
out of a job.

[Arlo]
This skirts the question. I've already said Wally would do the minimum necessary
to fulfill the labor contract. The question is, why should Wally "care" (to use
Pirsig's word) about turning out high Quality work, unless that work provides
direct financial renumeration above what he would receive by doing the bare
minimum required? If his salary isn't going to increase, and he is not in
danger of losing his job, why should Wally do anything more than the absolute
lowest and least he can do?

[Arlo previously]
You don't see the problem? You are the one who raised the issue of the loss of
craftsmanship.

[Platt]
I did? I've forgotten when. Can you refer to the post where I bemoaned the loss
of craftsmanship?

[Arlo]
Maybe I'm mistaken. If so, my apologies. You had made a post about the loss of
"value" between the moral pilgrims and modern day people. Maybe it was me who
brought "craftsmanship" into the picture, because, according to ZMM, it too has
been a value that has slowly decayed in American society.

[Platt]
Sense of identity with a product is required for it to have Quality? I don't
think so.

[Arlo]
So again, you disagree with Pirsig's assessment that "It is this identity that
is the basis of craftsmanship in all the technical arts. And it is this
identity that modern, dualistically conceived technology lacks. The creator of
it feels no particular sense of identity with it. The owner of it feels no
particular sense of identity with it. The user of it feels no particular sense
of identity with it. Hence, by Phædrus’ definition, it has no Quality."?

[Platt]
I admire many  things that I neither possess nor had any part in 
making, yet I recognize their quality instantly. 

[Arlo]
I think Pirsig would say that in recognizing the quality, you display a sense of
identity with it. 

[Platt]
I think its the profit-hungry types you rail against who have built the 
machinery that has automated turning screws and freed labor from such tasks. 
Such "normative production practices" have given people the gift of time to
craft quality lives, i.e. time to pursue excellence and follow their bliss.

[Arlo]
Not according to any study I am able to find. All point to a steady increase in
our daily labor time, and a steady decrease in our "non-labor" personal, family
and enjoyment time. So, I suppose if we turn back the clock to 1969, when
working couples had an average 22 hours a week MORE to devote to "following
their bliss", that may help.

Arlo