[MD] Politics

[skutvik at online.no]

Ron.  

26 Feb. you wrote:

> But what does MORAL mean to you? Is moral "struggle"
> Or "domination"?

Bo:
I'm not sure what your questions asks, but I will try to explain the 
basics of the MOQ. Normally - in SOM that is - what's right and 
wrong  (moral) is something subjective, existing only for us, there 
is no moral "out there". Pirsig's beginning LILA with anthropology 
was to show that a study of human societies from SOM's premise 
- that of moral as non-existent - leads nowhere. Only from the 
premises of moral as reality itself can anything be understood. 
But this is resisted by science and anthropology is a scientific 
discipline, so he realized that anthropology as the means to show 
that moral is the very essence of reality weren't viable. He 
understood that a total upheaval was needed:  A Quality 
Metaphysics.

(That the terms moral, value and ethics are variants over the 
master-term "Quality" is taken for granted ...no?).        

Hence the MOQ which splits reality along the Dynamic 
Moral/Static Moral line and then the known static moral levels 
and between them a constant struggle.       

Ron:
> American Intellectual morals condemned Nazi Social morals,
> What are intellectual morals?

As follows from the MOQ premises there also exist as a moral 
struggle between the social and intellectual levels. Pirsig says 
somewhere that all human conflict is based in the social/intellect 
one. He of course means since the intellectual level emerged 
because there surely were a lot of inter-social conflicts at the time 
when that level was "leading edge".     

OK, this easily  becomes about the pesky intellectual level, but 
again it's clear that the SOL interpretation is mandatory to 
understand the social/intellectual conflict. Meaning that the 
intellectual level is what is described in ZAMM as the emergence 
of SOM. Its objectivity deemed the old social Aretê the place in 
its subjective realm, something that the social level won't have 
because it's the parent of intellect. The rest is history, the last 
social value's stand in Western World was Nazism and Fascism 
versus the Allied Forces, representing intellectual morals - 
democracy the primary pattern.   

>  I missed this part asleep drooling On my test paper. Are you speaking
> of Christian philosophy? 

Yes, you must have missed kindergarten and most of  the lower 
classes. But seriously, one must understand the enormity of the 
MOQ scope. Christianity along with other (at least the Semitic 
type) religions is to be found inside the level framework 
subordinated the static moral system - not sources of moral as 
they themselves claim. OK, you are probably fast asleep already 
so I stop here, but I'm a bit shocked at people participating in this 
discussion with such a weak grasp of the basics of the MOQ. You 
are not alone however and a nice guy otherwise ;-). 


Bo