LS Re: in nothingness there is a great working

Donald S. Rosenow (
Fri, 28 Aug 1998 16:41:55 +0100

The Quality Event is not necessarily moral at all. A rock hitting the
Earth is no more than that, albeit a rock that will cause a low quality
biological environment for Homo Sapiens. Is it not our response to the
event that determines the morality? The immediate response of the
survivors has to be pure biological survival. The best chance for
individual survival is almost(?) inevitably submission to a social
cooperative of some kind. I don't think that societies just happen; an
effective society has as its genesis an individual who intellectualizes
the groundrules that are later codified as mores and rules of conduct.

Ant McWatt wrote:

"Re-examining your marriage example, Theo, I was reminded of Richard
Rigel. Maybe your belief that "Pirsig's grasp of morality is, at least
a little,suspect" is based on some on some implicit or explicit
Victorian moral codes?

"I still can't agree with your idea that a marriage is purely static,
either. I'm sure that sound wrong. Or if you are not saying this, then
in which way is marriage
Dynamic which adultery is not?"

Marriage, and it is important to remember that the form of the marriage
is less important than the function, is a social control of biology, and
is therefore more moral than promiscuity. It is a contract with one's
spouse and with society. Adultery is a breach of that contract. Within
the marriage, the relationship of husband to wife is rife with the
possiblity of Dynamic Quality, not least because of the Static nature of
the compact.


homepage -
unsubscribe/queries -

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:43:39 CEST