[MD] Essentialism and the MOQ

[LARAMIE LOEWEN]

Hi Ham --

Marsha quoted [on 11/16] a few passages from ZAMM indicating Quality
isn't "assumed to be non-polar".  But I see what you're saying, and as an 
articulation of the ethical nature of the intellect, perhaps it could be a 
supplement to the MoQ.

Cheers,
Laramie




  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Ham Priday<mailto:hampday1 at verizon.net> 
  To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org<mailto:moq_discuss at moqtalk.org> 
  Sent: Monday, November 27, 2006 12:45 AM
  Subject: Re: [MD] Essentialism and the MOQ



  Hi Laramie --

  > How could man discover good and bad in an amoral universe?

  He not only can but does. "Amoral" simply means being neither moral nor
  immoral, neither all-good nor all-bad.  The problem with Pirsig's Quality is
  that it is assumed to be non-polar; that is, we tend to equate it with
  Goodness.  Although we sometimes hear an MoQer speak of a "low-quality"
  idea, it is uncommon and most likely offered in jest.  That's another reason
  I prefer "Value": it is a measure of things, like the proverbial scales of
  justice.

  As I said to SA,
  > If reality were perfectly moral, and you were part of
  > it, then you would be perfectly moral, too.  In fact,
  > you would know nothing of immorality.  How could
  > we moralize -- distinguish goodness from badness
  > -- if everything was already moral?  The whole point of
  > experiencing life as a free individual is to realize the
  > value of an amoral reality.

  There's a reason that the Tree of Knowedge introduced to Eve by Satan bore
  fruit of both Good and Evil: it acquainted man with the polarity of Value.

  Could you value happiness if you had never experienced sadness?  Could you
  appreciate justice if you never experienced injustice?  Do you really think
  we could enjoy the goodness of this world without knowing what evil was?
  There are no absolutes in this world; but there is no end of "relative"
  values.  Each individual stands at the center of the value spectrum; and the
  goodness he chooses becomes his value complement.  We humans are the "active
  agents" in the process of making being aware of value.  Every self seeks the
  value of being and intereprets it in his own unique way.  As a result,
  reality is different for every individual.

  Morality is a human concept, not an innate property of Nature.  It is man
  who, by distinguishing what is good and worthy from what is mediocre and
  unworthy, "is the measure of all things".  Indeed, it is his purpose and
  role in the universe.

  Does this answer your question, Laramie?

  Essentially yours,
  Ham

  moq_discuss mailing list
  Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
  http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org<http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org>
  Archives:
  http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/<http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/>
  http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/<http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/>