From: Ian Glendinning (ian@psybertron.org)
Date: Wed Dec 01 2004 - 19:24:39 GMT
Who's obfuscating Platt ?
You said
"Is it not an absolute that the MOQ supports individual autonomy within the
constraints of the MOQ framework"
You're just playing the linguistic game of semantics with "axiomatic
statements of the pragmatic" again.
No, the MoQ is not absolute, just the best emergent framework we humans
currently have - it will evolve like the rest of us - yes, not just the
biological and higher, but even the hard physical layer, as we learn more
and more fundamental physics.
You said
"Sanctioning what such luminaries as Stalin, Hitler and a host of secular
tyrants decided was good for humanity."
Utter garbage and you know it, you scaremonger. What is your game ?
No way does a relative morality sanction such things.
Relative to an avoidable road-traffic accident those events are diabolical.
Relative to one such tyrant who secretly sets up a neigbouring planet with
his clones and obliterates the earth and all existing known life including
mankind, then perhaps they are a marginally lesser evil.
The pont is it's relative.
The context is the history of the known world to date, as neatly, usefull,
pragmatically (but not axiomatically) encapsulated in the MoQ. Get a grip,
or I'll have to quote poetry at you again, because rational argument is
fruitless.
I predict your next mail will be smartass remark about my statement
"The MoQ is not absolute" being axiomatic and absolute.
Save yourself the effort Platt.
Ian.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Platt Holden" <pholden@sc.rr.com>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>; <owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk>
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 5:50 PM
Subject: Re: MD Is Morality Relative?
> Ian, you seem to be obfuscating the issues here . . .
>
> > "If the MOQ champions individual autonomy, it appears the MOQ supports
the
> > basic thrust of Ayn Rand's virtue of selfishness." Yeah, right !?!
Clearly
> > it does not suport "absolute" autonomy, just individual autonomy within
the
> > constraints of its own MoQ framework. Ayn Rand wouldn't recognise the
MoQ
> > if she tripped over it.
>
> Is it not in one's absolute self-interest to adhere to the constraints of
> the MOQ framework? Is it not an absolute that the MOQ supports individual
> autonomy within the constraints of the MOQ framework, as you say? Or are
> these ideas fungible to the situation (contextualism) or to the mores of
> society (relativism) or to what others find congenial (political
> correctness), or to whatever suits your mood of the moment (anarchy)?
> Let's address the underlying issues here.
>
> As for Rand, she would certainly recognize Pirsig's attempt to build a
> "rational morality" because that's what she attempted to do, too.
>
> > "I see a host of moral absolutes in the Unitarian minister's sermon,
such
> > as -- moral decisions should serve the good of humanity.... etc etc ..."
> > How in anybody's language is that "absolute". You've just shifted the
> > definition of "moral" (absolute or relative) to the definition of "good"
> > (absolute or relative).
>
> I don't know about you, but what is moral is what is good in my book.
>
> > The minister is simply begging (or leading up to)
> > the question of "So, what is the good of humanity"
>
> Right. And his answer is, "It's relative," sanctioning what such
> luminaries as Stalin, Hitler and a host of secular tyrants decided was
> "good for humanity." The minister recognizes (but doesn't admit) that a
> relativist saws off the limb on which he sits, and so he grasps for such
> absolutes as "morality must be based on respect, care and love."
>
> > Surely we MoQ'ers have a working basis for evaluating relative good,
> > morality, quality.
>
> Surely we do. Problem is, how many MOQ'ers are there?
>
> > I do wonder at the motives in your arguments.
>
> My motive is to bring to light and examine basic assumptions, and to
> figure out what's the best morality for a nation to follow until the MOQ
> is widely known and accepted.
>
> What's yours?
>
> Platt
>
>
>
> 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
>
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 : Wed Dec 01 2004 - 22:18:49 GMT