[MD] Subjectivity in the MOQ

[Joseph Maurer]

On Saturday 14 March 2009 5:34 PM Platt responds to Joe;

 
> Hi Joe, 
> 
> Thanks for responding, but I don't grasp your point. Do you think
> moral choices are relative to individuals and/are cultures or
> not? It would seem from Pirsig's SODV quote that it is. But, that
> would put a kibosh on his idea of a universal morality would it
> not? To put it another way, what moral standards does the MOQ
> propose, if any? If there are standards, by what authority would
> they be enforced if each individual is allowed to make
> moral choices based on his life history?
> 
> Thanks,
> Platt

Hi Platt,

IMO Pirsig posits a moral order of evolution: Inorganic etc..  Is this
hierarchical order in existence, the metaphysical basis for a moral
judgment?  What is being judged? Is it a manifestation of an individual
person within an event or the hierarchical order?  IMO According to Pirsig
there are four orders in existence inorganic, organic, social, intellectual,
a moral order.  I prefer an analogy to the musical scale for order, seven
levels in DQ existence.

What is the measure for a manifestation within a particular order?  Does MOQ
the statement of the order, DQ/SQ the experience within the order qualify?
IMO these three things are present in an individual manifestation.  What it
is, what it is not, what is the neutral support level (+,-,0).

Can I observe a law of 4 or 7 in determining the level for order?  A law of
three to determine the manifestation?  IMO Both are involved in a moral
judgment.

Enforcement is good or bad.   I don¹t know if my thoughts are any clearer?
The metaphysics of morality (experience) is difficult without commandments
or particular decisions to judge.

I would guess the standard of authority to be what is metaphysically
described.  And here I thought we were just having fun!

Joe


On 3/14/09 5:34 PM, "Platt Holden" <plattholden at gmail.com> wrote:

>> On Saturday 14 March 2009 8:27 AM Platt asks all:
>> 
>> <snip>
>> 
>> "The reason there is a difference between individual evaluations of
>> quality
>> is that although Dynamic Quality is a constant, these static patterns
>> are
>> different for everyone because each person has a different static pattern
>> of
>> life history. Both the Dynamic Quality and the static patterns influence
>> his
>> final judgment. That is why there is some uniformity among individual
>> value
>> judgments but not complete uniformity." (Pirsig--SODV)
>>  
>> With one stroke Pirsig overthrows his premise of universal morality by
>> admitting to moral relativity. Further, he implies that to overcome
>> moral
>> relativity is impossible because "each person has a different static
>> pattern
>> of life history."
>> <snip>
>> 
>> "Where have I go wrong in this post?"
>> 
>> Hi Platt and all,
>> 
>> If principles for a manifestation are established, are they the same as
>> the
>> principles for an order?  DQ is an undefined principle in order expressed
>> by
>> evolution MOQ.  I prefer 7 levels of evolution.  DQ is also coupled with
>> SQ
>> in a manifestation  within a particular order of evolution, MOQ DQ/SQ.
>> IMO
>> The relationships of DQ between a manifestation and order are different.
>> DQ
>> as the order of evolution stands alone since it is describing existence.
>> For a manifestation, MOQ, the DQ stands with SQ as evolution as Pirsig
>> says.
>> 
>> Joe
> 
> Hi Joe, 
> 
> Thanks for responding, but I don't grasp your point. Do you think moral
> choices are relative to individuals and/are cultures or not? It would seem
> from Pirsig's SODV quote that it is. But, that would put a kibosh on his
> idea of a universal morality would it not? To put it another way, what
> moral standards does the MOQ propose, if any? If there are standards,  by
> what authority would they be enforced if each individual is allowed to make
> moral choices based on his life history?
> 
> Thanks,
> Platt
>     
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> On 3/14/09 8:27 AM, "Platt Holden" <plattholden at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> All:
>>> 
>>> A major premise of the MOQ is the existence of a universal moral order,
>> of
>>> good and evil, right and wrong. Understanding this moral order depends
>> on
>>> understanding the constant conflicts between the evolutionary moral
>> levels.
>>> What is right at the biological level (the law of the jungle) is wrong
>> at
>>> the social level (laws of society), etc. Also required is the assumption
>> of
>>> an indefinable moral force called Dynamic Quality.
>>> 
>>> But when it comes to individuals, universal morality appears to revert
>> to
>>> individual idiosyncrasies. In a word, morality becomes subjective -- a
>>> concept the MOQ otherwise attempts to deny.
>>> 
>>> "The reason there is a difference between individual evaluations of
>> quality
>>> is that although Dynamic Quality is a constant, these static patterns
>> are
>>> different for everyone because each person has a different static
>> pattern
>>> of life history. Both the Dynamic Quality and the static patterns
>> influence
>>> his final judgment. That is why there is some uniformity among
>> individual
>>> value judgments but not complete uniformity." (Pirsig--SODV)
>>> 
>>> With one stroke Pirsig overthrows his premise of universal morality by
>>> admitting to moral relativity. Further, he implies that to overcome
>> moral
>>> relativity is impossible because "each person has a different static
>>> pattern of life history."
>>> 
>>> I think moral relativists (the multiculturist, political correctness,
>>> tolerance-above-all crowd) that infest academia would eagerly seize on
>>> Pirsig's acknowledgment of subjective nature of moral judgments to toss
>> the
>>> MOQ out of serious philosophical consideration if indeed they haven't
>>> already done so.
>>> 
>>> Perhaps this is what our friend Ham has been banging about all along. So
>> to
>>> all true blue MOQites I ask, "Where have I go wrong in this post?"
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Platt
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>    
>>> 
>>>     
>>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>>> Archives:
>>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>> 
>> 
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> 
> 
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/