[MD] Joseph Campbell

[plattholden at gmail.com]

On 8 May 2009 at 18:11, Andre Broersen wrote:

> Platt to Andre:
> You present a nice capsule summary of SOM philosophy supporting
> America's free market culture, currently being challenged by an influx
> of European socialist doctrine. Whether I hold to the static patterns
> you cite as the basis for American culture is now more or less mute
> because of the insights of the MOQ. As you know, it gives a new
> basis for supporting free markets.
> 
> Andre:
> Hi Platt: Can you explain to me how Pirsig, or for that matter the MoQ
> supports the 'American free market culture' when it is grounded in:
> 1) the subjective egocentric religious doctrine of Protestantism and the
> individualistic political doctrine, grounded in Descartes,Malebranche, and
> Locke's conception of a person as a mental substance, and
> 2) the laissez-faire economic theory formulated by Adam Smith and Jevons,
> which rests in turn on Locke,Hume and Bentham.?
> (I know some cosmetics have been applied to the above theories [ e.g Keynes]
> but they are still rock solid).
> 
> I always thought that the MoQ rejected theism and subject/object
> analises and that it rejected the existence of a value-free
> scientific/atomistic/amoral rationality upon which the philosophies of point
> 2 in the above are grounded.

Pirsig presents his reasons for supporting free market capitalism in Chapter 
17 of Lila. To answer your question I suggest you read what he wrote there. 
I can add nothing. To me his explanation is complete.

> Secondly you say:
> That seems to me to be a rational argument that supports what some might
> consider old fashioned SOM assumptions. However, while it's good to have a
> new argument from Mr. Pirsig, those old assumptions have proved their value
> in individual freedom and standard of living we enjoy today.
> 
> Andre:
> How do you reconcile the fact that the philosophies, mentioned above, placed
> protection of property rights above human rights? This seems to me to be a
> case of a social PoV (property rights) usurping an Intellectual PoV (human
> rights). And you know what this means in MoQ terms.

Property rights -- the right to keep what you lawfully earn -- is the 
foundation of individual liberty. Those who are forcibly prevented from 
keeping what they earn are slaves.

> Also, what standard of living do Americans enjoy today? I have seen stats
> quite a while ago now and that did not really encourage me to think that
> America was an especially special place to live in (apart from the scenery)?

Americans enjoy a very high standard of living. It's a special place to live 
because it more open to Dynamic Quality than socialist countries. Pirsig 
cites the dynamism of New York City as an example:

"Its strength is its looseness. It's the freedom to be so awful that gives it the 
freedom to be so good." (Lila, 17)

Regards,
Platt


.