From: PhaedrusWolf@aol.com
Date: Tue Nov 16 2004 - 23:24:28 GMT
In a message dated 11/16/04 5:49:18 PM Eastern Standard Time,
markheyman@infoproconsulting.com writes:
Whenever people care strongly for their ideas, there will always be
the possibility of exasperation when others don't see things the same
way. We're only human.
Yes,
I would agree, we are only human. In DQ, we are leaning more toward creative
excellence as opposed to academic excellence, so we would feel passionately
about the discoveries, these immortal truths. This would lead us to this
exasperation, but as we are looking for philosophical truths, we must accept what
we might see as a misunderstanding from others we deal with calmness and
understanding. We might also need to look through their eyes. Would this not be
true?
What about the analogy of the mental patient in "Lila?" Would a sane person
be able to find the cure for an insane person? All the sane person can do is
try to change the insane person into a sane person in this sane person's view.
The same might hold true if we were to try to teach intellect to a religious
person. We would need to change this religious person into an intellectual,
as we view it; maybe a scientific thinking intellectual person. By doing so,
we are saying that our sanity is the only sanity that can possibly be true.
We are denying all other intellectuals in the world who see things differently
than we do. By doing so, we have become this person we despise; the closed
minded religious fanatic who can only see things through the eyes of his
preacher or theologian.
Maybe this would be a member of the Church of God, where some of the
strongest beliefs in the 'Word' might hold true. This individual might want to tell
you you can know nothing about what is best for society as you will allow the
girls and women in your City-state to wear jewelry. You obviously must be
some kind of fanatic.
Do you get where I am coming from?
Think of the play-writes such as Shakespeare or Shaw. It is obvious that
their poetry was not imitative, but in order to get their poetry considered,
they had to write the more acceptable "Much ado about nothing" plays to get
their real thoughts considered. Did they sell out, or did they manage to add a
little DQ to society?
A society, and its social patterns would mirror the social patterns of the
most sane individual in the City-state. To cure an insane society, we must be
able to think insanely. Society is made up of religious, political, and
scientific 'Facts' in the eyes of the members of society. You can't remove the
preachers, presidents, or professors, you must add your DQs in a bottom-up
fashion. You would have to at least pretend that these preachers, presidents, and
professors added some quality to society in order to get your DQ considered.
No one is going to listen to your ideas while you are confined to a
sociological straight-jacket.
What you think?
Chin
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Nov 16 2004 - 23:27:06 GMT