[MD] The Individual Level

[Platt Holden]

> [Platt]
> We agree. But why not charge the NYT with treason and penalize them 
> according to the law?
> 
> [Arlo]
> Because I don't know if their actions were "treasonous". If they prove
> to be, then they should be penalized accordingly.

Giving aid and comfort to the enemy is defined as treason in our 
Constitution. Looks like a clear cut case to me. 

> [Arlo previously]
> So, following Pirsig's guides for getting in touch with Quality isn't
> important, but obedience to social level morals is? Strange, but to each
>  his own.
> 
> [Platt]
> Those are you interpretations of Pirsig's guides. I disagree with many
> of  your interpretations as explained below.
> 
> [Arlo]
> You don't really explain how you interpret them differently. All you do
> is suggest that they be ignored.

It's a matter of emphasis. You take most of your examples from ZMM. I 
take mine from Lila. Neither of us is so wise as to speak for Pirsig, 
but I consider his later thinking to correct some of his earlier 
thinking, changing from the Classic/Romantic split to the 
Static/Dynamic Quality split being the major case in point.

> [Arlo]
> Quality is not dedicated to a free-market. A free-market is an economic
> system (social) that strikes a balance between static and Dynamic
> forces. As such, in the QPP definition, I refer instead to a person who
> seeks balance between the static and the Dynamic. 

It's more accurate to say a free market opens the door to DQ. The free 
market, like free speech, is an individual level virtue. 

> [Arlo]
> What "interpretation"? The specific mention of a social level pattern?
> That would be predictable, but where in Pirsig's discussions on arete
> and gumption do you find "free-marketeer" as a hallmark of someone in
> touch with Quality? Was Homer a free-marketeer? No mention, and yet
> Pirsig heralds his dedication to Quality.

On further investigation of the root of arete in Lila, Pirsig traced it 
back to mean "ritual." This is a good example of what I meant by saying 
Pirsig progressed in his thinking from ZMM to Lila. "The meanings, 
grouped together, suggested something different than his (earlier) 
interpretation of arete." (Lila, 30 -parens added).  
 
> [Arlo previously]
> This, of course, refers to the Homerian hero, who before S/O dualism 
> followed arete. Pirsig writes, "Areté implies a respect for the
> wholeness  or oneness of life". You disagree? Or is "arete" a liberal
> thing?

In Lila, Pirsig discoveres "arete" meant ritual. Lots of that on both 
sides of the aisle, but more so with liberals, like their ritual effort 
to raise the minium wage. 

> [Arlo]
> Arete is a liberal thing? Okay, if you say so. Pirsig goes on to say,
> "[Arete] we translate 'virtue' but is in Greek 'excellence."" Lightning
> hits! Quality! Virtue! Dharma! That is what the Sophists were teaching!
> Not ethical relativism. Not pristine "virtue." But areté. Excellence."
> 
> So, "arete", excellence is a "liberal thing, kumbaya". From the mouth of
> Platt.

See above. 

> [Arlo]
> In ZMM, Pirsig lays the foundations for knowing what Quality is. In
> LILA, he lays the foundations for analyzing it. But, if you don't know
> what he means by Quality (ZMM), Lila is purposeless.

Disagree. Pirsig says explicitly in Lila what he means by Quality. It's 
"direct experience." You don't have to read ZMM to understand the MOQ.
 
> [Platt]
> Maybe [Pirsig is a liberal], except I like the Pirsig as I described him
> and as he presents himself in Lila.
> 
> [Arlo]
> Of course, you like the sections that support the Party. Does that's
> surprise me.

And you like the sections that support you leftist leanings. So?

> [Platt]
> And your PPG is Bill Clinton, your poster boy. Bet you have a life-sized
> cardboard cut out of him in your bedroom. So there.
> 
> [Arlo]
> Really? You think Bill Clinton has a beginner's mind, is egoless and
> strives to demonstrate art and practice as indivisible? I'm shocked! I
> may have liked some of his policy decisions, but I'd hardly call him a
> QPP.
> 
> I don't have any cut-outs in my bedroom, but I did have a poster of
> Farrah Fawcett. Does that count?
 
Clinton has a beginner's mind as evidenced by his behavior with Monica 
in the White House. Having a Farrah Fawcett poster demonstrates your  
appreciation of beauty. On that level  we would probably find much 
agreement, except in the case of rock and roll. :-)

Incidentally, while reviewing what Pirsig had to say about arete in 
Chap. 30, I happened across the following: "Dharma is duty. It is not 
external duty which is arbitrarily imposed by others. Neither is it 
internal duty which is arbitrarily decided by one's own conscience. 
Dhrama is beyond all questions of what is internal and what is 
external."  Does this suggest to you that all our talk about what is a 
Quality person is a waste of time since "internal duty," trying to be a 
QPP, is fundamentally arbitrary?  

Finally, duty imposed by others vs. duty according to one's own 
conscience is what I see as separating the collective from the 
individual level.  Your trying to be a QPP is an individual level 
exercise. I think you would make the attempt even if stranded on a 
desert island -- not that that you would want to test it. :-) 

Platt