[MD] Politics and Change

[hzeytin at gmail.com]

Hello David, Ian
I did read ove the chapters in Lila and it did refresh my memory on his striking explanations. Nevertheless, as much as you'd want to call it "heavily on politics" despite the mention of Wilson and Roosevelt, this definition is still about how politics is used to shift social value systems. There was DQ at intellectual level that these presidents brought about or "capitalized" on I do agree, but I'd vote for the latter. He is talking about a struggle between social and intellectual levels in particular (not universal) circumstances.
About a particular history, that of the US, of Victorian GB etc. And the analysis is convincing, but what with the Bolshevik/ Chinese revolutions, the WWII, the reshuffling of the balkans and the Middle East after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, India, revolutions in Latin America? Do you think Pisrigs explanation "fits all"? No. It offers a mode of analysis, of understanding.
And I'm not sure whether the intellectual level is just about what intellectuals think and bring about - I would rather broaden the scope to all and every individual with whatevr intellectual value they contribute to the "domain of ideas" - that which can be referenced to a lineage of individuals but does not necessarily fully belong to them. The level where "truth" is more important than opinion, "knowledge" supercedes information and relevance and clarity are basic tenets. Not necessarily just rationality...
I do not think the evolutionary leap not happening actually digresses from what I was thinking. For this you might consider looking at my second post which follows up with some ideas on how in my humble mind the DQ aspect fits in.
Btw, the example in Slovenia (as small a state it might be) on how a intellectual values reshape the society, or how this happened also in the foundation of the Turkish republic, or to certain degrees the Cuban revolution and of course the Calvinist reformations are solid examples of how the intellect can read the social value systems and from the truths they derive from them influence it through radical or ethical stances.
Have a nice day,
HZ

dmb says:
Hello HZ. Chapters 21 and 22 of Lila both focus pretty heavily on politics. 
Pirsig uses a bunch of historical examples to explain the political 
conflicts of the 20th century. He paints it as a clash between social level 
values and intellectual level values. The shift from traditional power 
structures to intellectually guided societies is some kind of evolutionary 
leap. Its not just a shift from the static to the dynamic, although that's 
certainly part of the equation too. Anyway, those chapters will elaborate on 
the idea with specific names, historical events and ideologies involved in 
the drama. Check it out.



Platt says:
Pirsig, I hasten to add, pointed out that modern intellect, in its attempt to
guide society, contains a fatal flaw, namely, an inability to acknowledge the 
existence of values. Thus, the "evolutionary leap" has fallen into an abyss.

Dmb says:
Platt you make a good point, but I'd have to pick you up on one word,
since it is what we've been talking about elsewhere ...

It's not an "inability" to  recognize values, but a "failure" to do
so. No intrinsic inability why that historical failure can't be fixed
by an evolution in that intellect to take values into account ... as
proposed by such luminaries as Pirsig, Dennett, Maxwell, to name a
few.

The evolutionary leap has not so much fallen into an abyss, as not yet
fully happened. But we digress from HZ's political point.


Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device