From: Ian Glendinning (ian@psybertron.org)
Date: Sat Dec 11 2004 - 00:03:10 GMT
Mel, (and Platt, embedded)
I kind of agree.
I actually don't care / mind / object to where Platt believes these "good
morals" originate.
I defend his right to believe in a god (as I've said).
As someone who holds the MoQ in high regard, I see it as a natural fit with
the MoQ, and I kind of expect that to be the case with others in this
discussion group. But we know Platt is looking at morals independant of the
MoQ. I say OK, fair do's. But why must Platt keep introducing his god into
discussions that don't "need" it ? If the argument is true "wherever" these
morals originate, why introduce on particular conceivable source. Surely
Occam has some place here ?
The question of "origination" is Platt's not mine.
As I've said, I really don't care "why", if that means "which purposeful
being decided" ?
The answer to that question can only ever be "the omniscient one".
I accept "this is good" (or not) because it fits empirical reality.
Why introduce "because god deems it" superfluously ?
Just to wind me up :-) ?
Ian
----- Original Message -----
From: "ml" <mbtlehn@ix.netcom.com>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 4:36 PM
Subject: Re: MD Is Morality Relative?
> Hello Ian / Platt:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Platt Holden" <pholden@sc.rr.com>
> To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>; <owner-moq_discuss@venus.co.uk>
> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 7:16 AM
> Subject: Re: MD Is Morality Relative?
>
>
>
> > Platt had said pointedly:
> > > [Quote] For example, my hard-nosed, no-nonsense intellect tells me it
> would
> > > be a grievous error to remove from a vital, free society the idea that
a
> > > Creator endows certain inalienable rights on every person -- like
life,
> > > liberty and the pursuit of happiness (to coin a phrase). [Unquote]
> >
> > Ian said, with a jaunty air, yet thoughtfully:
> > > I say
> > > I absolutely agree it would be unwise to remove the idea that those
> rights
> > > are "natural human rights", learned by generations of catastrophic
> mistakes
> > > throughout history, but why does their value depend on the
supernatural
> > > idea that they are valid rights simply because your Creator created
> them. I
> > > genuinely have no wish to insult your spiritual beliefs, but why let
> them
> > > get in the way of a top class idea like human rights ? It's almost
like
> you
> > > subscribe to the "opiate of the people" viewpoint, like the masses are
> > > somehow too dim to understand anything but a simplistic fairy story -
> don't
> > > want them asking too many awkward questions, give 'em religion, etc. I
> find
> > > that insulting.
> >
>
> Platt replied with restrained dignity:
> > Many people would find it insulting that you characterize their
religious
> > belief as a "fairy story." As for human rights, I think it's better to
> > have them sanctioned by a higher power than by men or majorities who,
for
> > whatever excuse, can revoke them "in the public interest."
> >
> > But, I could be wrong. My hope was that this group could reconcile
> > religious belief with intellect to come up with some guiding moral
> > principles that would help mend the current social divide until the MOQ
> > becomes more widely accepted. To summarily reject those who believe in a
> > Creator doesn't seem helpful toward that end.
> >
>
> mel, squeaked from his place in the corner::
> In some ways it seems almost upside down to discuss
> WHERE the moral principles originate, when the more
> important point is that extant moral principles are not
> respected, other people are not respected, and the
> result of the failure socially and biologically, not to
> mention intellectually results in direct justifications
> of violence.
>
> examples: Socially - fundamentalist organizations
> of any stripe, most visibly now, regard their own as
> possessing the truth and everyone else as unworthy.
> "Liberal" writers have no respect for opposition.
> "Conservative" wirters have no respect for opposition.
> (both seem rather to prefer the "rhino-ectomy to spite
> the face" approach to an alternative of compromise.)
>
> Biologically, it is the "objectification" of another, a very
> pointed lack of respect for the Quality of another, as
> lesser that allows battery, intimidation, and killing.
>
> Intellectually, the ease of ridicule that creeps into the
> treatment of others in print. Chomsky of Friedman,
> ourselves to each other, myself of Chomsky,
> everyone of Bush, all betray a similar though more subtle
> "violence" through lack of respect.
>
> ...it's the diminution...
>
> RE: the matter of the Opiate of fairy story faith...
>
> People exist at all levels of sophistication and it
> is best that there are levels by which they are all
> reached. (Or by which they can manage in life...)
>
> As a child is "better" informed with simple explanations,
> which hopefully are revised and made more complex
> and complete through life, so too are some people
> who for whatever reason "stall" at a certain stage of
> their development.
>
> If my NASCAR Billy-Bob neighbor needs to picture a
> lightening throwing old bearded white guy to keep
> from beating his wife, then -- it works.
>
> If the woman on the block behind finds refuge in
> an oceanic consciousness that brings compassion
> then good on 'er.
>
> Different levels of sophistication are why this is such
> a small group...
>
> The beauty of MoQ seems to me that the nature of
> morality becomes interpenetrative to all existence and
> indivisible from it...inescapable, always shining in your
> eyes. hmmmm
>
>
> thanks--mel
>
>
>
>
>
> 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 : Sat Dec 11 2004 - 00:07:24 GMT