[MD] suspended in language

[Steven Peterson]

Hi Arlo,

> [Steve]
> I think Pirsig's intent in this statement is to deny relativism as the claim
> that talking about moral truth only makes sense with respect to a specific
> culture and whatever can be justified within a given culture is actually
> true for that culture. For the relativist, truth (ethical and scientific) is
> reduced to justification.
>
> [Arlo]
> I think Pirsig was speaking broadly to the moral superiority of dominance of
> higher levels over lower levels. "Cultures" where intellectual patterns are
> controlled by social patterns are immoral, as are "cultures" where
> biological values hold dominion over social values. But the word "culture"
> is itself problematic here, as it makes "culture" something outside of
> social and/or intellectual patterns themselves. Is "culture" a social
> pattern? An intellectual pattern? A combination of the social and
> intellectual levels? As Pirsig seems to use it, "culture" is the
> hierarchical instantiation of emergent patterns of value, it is the "MOQ in
> flesh and blood".

Steve:
In the MOQ, a culture is a collection of social and intellectual value
patterns. It is problematic to hope to draw clean lines between
cultures and the cultures within cultures, but I don't think the
possibility of being understood when deploying such a term as
"American culture" is as hopeless as you seem to think. It is very
possible that we are both thinking of roughly the same set of social
and intellectual patterns when we use the term. If either of us
suspects that we are not, we can discuss what we mean to come to some
common understanding of the term for the sake of a given discussion
comparing "American culture" to some other culture.

I'm guessing that the notion that some cultures and better and worse
in some ways than other cultures is not such a problem for you so much
as the fear of how such a notion could be deployed as a justification
for cruelty or well-meaning buit misguided subjugation.

Best,
Steve