Re: MD MOQ and The Moral Society

From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Fri Jul 22 2005 - 21:00:59 BST

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "Re: MD MOQ and The Moral Society"

    Hi Ant, All:

    Ant:
    > I know you have used this phrase of “biological terrorists” for quite a
    > while but as far as the MOQ is concerned I think it only allows a socially
    > driven terrorist (e.g. on the grounds of religion) or an intellectual one
    > (on the grounds of injustices). And even with the latter, there starts the
    > further issue of one person’s terrorist being another person’s freedom
    > fighter.

    I don't believe that for a minute. Muslim terrorists have no concept of
    political freedom. Furthermore, as far as the MOQ is concerned,
    "biological terrorist" is an appropriate description. From Lila, Chapter
    24:

    "Phaedrus had had no answer at the time, but he had one now. The idea that
    biological crimes can be ended by intellect alone, that you can talk crime
    to death, doesn't work. Intellectual patterns cannot directly control
    biological patterns. Only social patterns can control biological patterns,
    and the instrument of conversation between society and biology is not
    words. The instrument of conversation between society and biology has
    always been a policeman or a soldier and his gun."
        
    > One of the people who received a doctorate in Liverpool on the same day as
    > myself earlier this month was John Hume who was an Irish politician who
    > convinced Sinn Fein (the political arm of the IRA) to give up the armed
    > campaign against the British occupation of Ireland and, instead talk.
    > (Hume received a Nobel peace prize for this political work, btw). As Hume
    > made clear in his acceptance speech for his PhD, armed violence only
    > divides people further while dialogue brings them closer. Your labelling,
    > therefore, of other human beings as simply “biological terrorists” is
    > therefore not helpful especially when keeping in mind my supervisor’s
    > (Prof. Stephen Clark) observation that nearly all so-called terrorist
    > atrocities in this world are caused – somewhere down the line – due to a
    > serious injustice.

    Your professor sounds like an apologist for killers, blaming someone other
    than the perpetrators of crime. As for engaging biological criminals in
    dialogue, I repeat what Pirsig wrote:

    "The idea that biological crimes can be ended by intellect alone, that you
    can talk crime to death, doesn't work. Intellectual patterns cannot
    directly control biological patterns. Only social patterns can control
    biological patterns, and the instrument of conversation between society
    and biology is not words. The instrument of conversation between society
    and biology has always been a policeman or a soldier and his gun."
     
    > Considering the Pirsigs and myself were in central London only two days
    > ago, I would appreciate it with you being a supporter of the US-UK
    > occupation of Iraq, to carefully keep in mind what I’ve said to you above.
    > Next time, the Pirsigs and myself might not be so lucky.

    I know. Blaming the terrorist attacks in London on the liberation of Iraq
    was the first thing out of the mouth of George Galloway and the Socialist
    Workers Party. That you share their views is not surprising. But I am
    surprised you would argue that case on the grounds that next time the
    Pirsigs and you may not be so lucky-- an obvious "argumentum ad
    misericordiam."

    For those looking for "root causes" of the terrorist attacks in London, I
    suggest a careful re-reading of Chapter 24 of Lila and to contemplate
    deeply the following passage:

    "In the battle of society against biology, the new twentieth-century
    intellectuals have taken biology's side. Society can handle biology alone
    by means of prisons and guns and police and the military. But when the
    intellectuals in control of society take biology's side against society
    then society is caught in a cross fire from which it has no protection."

    Best regards,
    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



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jul 22 2005 - 21:59:17 BST