[MD] Quality decline

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting Heather Perella <spiritualadirondack at yahoo.com>:

> 
>      [Platt]
> > There needs to be a balance between Dynamic and
> > static with the emphasis on 
> > maintaining a fulcrum of opportunity that allows for
> > tipping in the direction
> > of the Dynamic. (Hope the metaphor works.) 
> 
>     Reality is static quality with dynamic quality. 
> There doesn't need to be this - there is this.  It is
> society and intellect that are not open to this when
> degenerate process are at work.  So, what have I said?
>  All generalities.

Balance with openness to DQ is the ideal. As Pirsig pointed out, socialism
closes the door on DQ will capitalism (free market) keeps it open -- with
benefits for all. 

>      [Platt] 
> > Marxism had more to do with economics than free
> > expression although it's tendency
> > towards totalitarianism puts a kibosh on free
> > speech, too. As for celebrity, Pirsig
> > has a lot of interesting things to say about it,
> > especially its role as a force
> > for social cohesion. It may be with America so
> > politically divided that the
> > rise of celebrity worship is a consequence -- a
> > means of fostering unity.
> 
>      Platt, that is an outstanding remark!  Specific,
> and I'm leaning towards your on point here.  No wonder
> celebrities make the news alongside politicans.  What
> celebrities are doing is thought of as fun and not so
> heady.  When Paris Hilton was placed into jail, out of
> jail, in jail, I still couldn't get out of my head
> that the whole episode was like a movie due to her
> being on TV so much.  It's difficult to digest when a
> celebrity gets into trouble, say for instance Martha
> Stewart.  I mean she was so motherly and likeable on
> TV, right?  She couldn't possible get into trouble. 
> Get my drift.  The celebrity doesn't only FOSTER
> unity, a celebrity IS unity.  A celebrity is a model,
> a social ideal.  At least, this is what I'm seeing
> with your comment here Platt.  Something along these
> lines, maybe?  If these fun loving people whom many
> let into their home on a daily basis get into trouble
> it's hard to believe these celebrities can be like
> that.  Now what of Paris Hilton with the sex tapes and
> drinking parties.  That's the popular thing to do
> now-a-days, right?  Especially with the teenagers and
> population in their twenties.  She's just doing what
> they do or want to do, right?
 
Right. The role models for today's female teenagers are Madonna, Britney and
Paris -- a sure sign of Quality decline. But I'm glad your agree with Pirsig's
insight that celebrity is a unifying force, particularly useful in today's
culture where political divisions are far apart and arouse strong passions
(see Arlo's posts). In other words, I agree with your comments.

Have a nice day.

Platt 


-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/