[MD] -elitist ideas

[MarshaV]

  At 08:18 PM 3/10/2007, Platt wrote:
>Quoting MarshaV <marshalz at charter.net>:
>
> > Arlo,
> >
> > For some reason your posts are showing up a jumble of words.
>
>Marsha,
>
>Maybe this will help:


Platt, Arlo,

(Thank you Platt.)

I love and respect RMP.  I cannot imagine more 
beautiful gifts than ZAMM, LILA, and the MOQ.  He 
is indeed a Sage and genius.  The world opened to 
me because of his books,,, him.

But it's all analogy, except for now, now, 
now.  What Pirsig has written is both right, 
wrong, and all of the above.  To explain and 
justify my point-of-view would require taking you 
down my path of thought.  That path is not neat 
and tidy, and would take a long time explain, and 
not worth the explanation.  It's a path that has 
been influenced greatly by the thought of RMP, 
but by others too.  It's a path open to new experience, but it is what it is.

 From my point-of-view, or Dynamic Quality, 
cannot be defined, and therefore IS NOT 
moral.  Pirsig, himself, has said it cannot be 
defined.  But I think it can be said that moving 
towards Quality, or Dynamic Quality, IS moral.

Remember, it's all analogy.


Marsha



  [Arlo]
>"What is today conventionally called "morality" 
>covers only one of these sets of
>moral codes, the social-biological code. In a subject­object metaphysics this
>single social-biological code is considered to be a minor, "subjective,"
>physically non-existent part of the universe. 
>But in the Metaphysics of Quality
>all these sets of morals, plus another Dynamic morality, are not only real,
>they are the whole thing." (LILA)
>
>"Finally there's a fourth Dynamic morality which isn't a code. He supposed you
>could call it a "code of Art" or something like that, but art is usually
>thought of as such a frill that that title undercuts its importance. The
>morality of the brujo in Zuni-that was Dynamic morality." (LILA)
>
>"Dynamic Quality is the pre-intellectual cutting 
>edge of reality, the source of
>all things, completely simple and always new. It was the moral force that had
>motivated the brujo in Zuni." (LILA)
>
>Both SQ and DQ are about morals. Quality is morality. There is static morality
>(on the four levels) and Dynamic morality that is eternally outside static
>patterns. Or, one could say "Dynamic Quality is a moral force".
>
>I think what your arguing against is that Dynamic morality is not a hostage of
>static social moral codes. Absolutely. Pirsig says, "Dynamic Quality is a
>higher moral order than static scientific 
>truth". But to say Dynamic Quality is
>amoral misses, in my opinion, what Pirsig was trying to accomplish.
>
>You often quote a passage I think is quite relevant.
>
>While sustaining biological and social patterns
>Kill all intellectual patterns.
>Kill them completely
>And then follow Dynamic Quality
>And morality will be served.
>
>It would make little sense to me to propose that following an amoral principle
>serves morality. "Follow Dynamic Quality"... "Follow that vague sense of
>'betterness'"... and because Quality is moral, "morality will be served".