[MD] Valuism and Quality

[Ham Priday]

 Hey John --

> Thanks for the mention and all, but I have to say you and I
> are philosophically speaking, miles apart.
>
> I started out in my youth in a philosopophy that was very,
> very anti-anthropocentric.  It made sense then and it makes
> sense now that if you make your reality subjective, you
> haven't got a you to stand on.

Most philosophy is not anthropocentric. And most individuals do not become 
philosophers is their youth.  So I am curious as to what extreme 
anti-anthropocentric
philosophy you were exposed to in your youth.

> Furthermore, my recent hero of choice is Josiah Royce, the
> Absolute Idealist who utterly refutes this stance and proves
> logically that the entire universe is made within the context of
> absolute value - and that the structure of the cosmos is an
> ethical culture.  I see my task here as to bring Royce to the
> Pirsigians in metaphysically confirmational way, in opposition
> to W. James - Royce's lifelong friend and philosophical antagonist.

I'm acquainted with James but have not read Royce.  The Harvard Encyclopedia 
of Philosophy quotes this statement by Royce: "My life means nothing, either 
theoretically or practically, unless I am a member of a community."  You 
won't have a problem selling that to the Pirsigians, since they've been 
preaching it for decades.  It's their tenet that the Social Level gives rise 
to the Intellectual (individual) Level.

The article goes on to explain Royce's collectivist concept of 
individuality:

"One of the more striking features of Royce's philosophy is its emphasis on 
communities as being logically prior to individuals.  As we have seen, Royce 
considers the notions of truth and knowledge unintelligible for the 
individual unless we posit an ultimate knower of objective truth, the 
infinite community of minds.  The notions of personal identity and purpose 
are likewise unintelligible unless we posit a community of persons that 
defines causes and establishes social roles for those individuals to 
embrace."

RMP must have been influenced by Royce even more than Rorty, as "infinite 
community of minds" fits the MoQ's collective consciousness like a glove. 
You're right John; we are indeed miles apart.

> That's just who I am right now.  I'm open, but I've got my
> static baggage like anybody.
>
> And secondly; I still like the term "People of Quality".  I use it
> in my head all the time and guess what?  It includes you, Ham.

Well, that's mighty generous of you, considering that I don't for a second 
equate having epicurean tastes with the quality of "me".

> Even though we fundamentally disagree, you care about Quality.
> Royce wrote a wonderful philosophy of Loyalty with a chapter
> called "Loyalty to Loyalty" and it resonates with Caring about Quality.
> And I know it when I see it.
>
> I don't see it in Individual Valuism.

There is no other kind of Valuism.  "Loyalty to loyalty" makes no sense to 
me.  I know he's talking about a community with a common cause.  But since 
value is something we want or desire, even in a collective sense, how can we 
not be "loyal" to our own values?

But thanks for responding, John.  It would appear that you are well on your 
way to adopting the "Quality People's" party line.

Best wishes,
Ham