[MD] How far do you go to preserve individual life?

[plattholden at gmail.com]

On 15 Sep 2010 at 20:33, Andre Broersen wrote:

  Platt to Andre:

Can we agree that any central government program that controls the production
and distribution of goods and/or services is "socialist."

Andre:
Can we agree that you are equating an intellectually run 'distribution of goods
and/or services' as socialist?

[P]
Pirsig claims a socialist society is intellectually guided. But, I disagree. 
Marx was as intellectual (or so many academic intellectuals say), but look at 
the results of his intellectual guidance in Russia, China, Cambodia, Cuba, etc. 
Fortunately, Pirsig saw the light in the superior morality of the free market 
because of it is more open to the evolutionary force of Dynamic Quality.   

Platt:
As Pirsig, wrote: "But the superorganism, the Giant, who is a
pattern of values superimposed on top of biological human bodies, doesn't mind
losing a few bodies to protect his greater interests." (Lila, 17) Sounds like
socialism to me, you know, the system justified by the slogan used by every
despot in history, "For the public good."

Andre:
I think you are very mistaken here Platt. Phaedrus made these observations from 
his
balcony in his New York appartment overlooking New York. He was reflecting on 
the
dominant social value system called capitalism in America and New York in 
particular.

[P]
You may be right. But, Pirsig specifically identified the Giant not with 
economic systems but with social organizations: "When societies and cultures 
and cities are seen not as inventions of "man" but as higher organisms than 
biological man, the phenomena of war and genocide and all the other forms of 
human exploitation become more intelligible. "Mankind" has never been 
interested in getting itself killed. But the superorganism, the Giant, who is a 
pattern of values superimposed on top of biological human bodies, doesn't mind 
losing a few bodies to protect his greater interests." (Lila, 17) Elswhere he 
had some positive things to say about capitalism. 

Platt:
I'm afraid you have omitted the real reason for the financial "crises" -- the
burst of the housing bubble due to the central's government's demand that banks
offer home mortgages to deadbeats.

Andre:
Yep, that was one of the reasons a Dutch bank, trying to gain a foothold in 
America,
also tried to justify its reckless, irresponsible, greed-inspired behaviour.

[P] 
Behavior forced upon it by government edict. No bank deliberately sets about to 
lose money.     

Platt:
To me, the highest human value is individual liberty...I have no objection 
whatsoever to
anyone who voluntarily chooses to help anyone they consider as having a "need." 
But, I do
object to having a gun at my head with the demand, "Give me your money because 
I need it
more that you do."

Andre:
It seems to me that you are really confusing a few things here Platt, and you 
are confusing 
me as well.Individual liberty...what does it mean? That I have the right to 
hold a gun at someone's
head and say: 'Give me your money'? This is the same thing Wilder's said at 
Ground Zero the other
day....he advocated 'In the name of freedom, no mosques here!

What I am getting at is that 'liberty' or 'freedom' imply certain preconditions 
and responsibilities.

[P]
I agree, especially personal responsibilities. 

Andre:
They imply agreed upon intellectual assumptions based on scientifically 
verifiable data.

[P]
What intellectual assumptions do you have in mind based on scientifically 
verifiable data?

Andre:
Given the dominant values we live in (intellectually supported) organic and 
social values and the
criticised (by Mr. Pirsig) assumptions of this dominant intellectual level the 
terms 'liberty' and
'freedom' may be in need of re-definition as well (as Mr. Pirsig has 
suggested).

[P]
The definition of Individual liberty seems clear to me -- the moral right of  
of intellectual values to be free from social interference. Or as Pirsig put 
it: "But what the larger intellectual structure of the Metaphysics of Quality 
makes clear is that this political battle of science to free itself from 
domination by social moral codes was in fact a moral battle! It was the battle 
of a higher, intellectual level of evolution to keep itself from being devoured 
by a lower, social level of evolution." (Lila, 24) 

Here in the U.S., the Tea Party is fighting this battle and is winning a few 
skirmishes against the entrenched social powers that be.         

Platt:
Thanks for the exchange.

Andre:
Mmm, are we finished? I mean...fine by me. You have the liberty and freedom to 
terminate a discussion
any time.

[P]
As you do, too. I just meant I'm enjoying the exchange.