From: Ant McWatt (antmcwatt@hotmail.co.uk)
Date: Wed Jul 27 2005 - 19:54:52 BST
Platt stated July 21st 2005:
“Who's doing that? We are. We're talking about moral societies and the
proper role of government. And yes, I definitely do say that killing a
million is worse than killing 100,000, just as killing two is worse than
killing one. I also believe some killing is justified, like killing
biological terrorists.”
Sam stated July 26th 2005:
Mark challenged anyone to a discussion on Lila [chapter] 24. The specific
context was Platt's use of a passage from that chapter stating:
“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.”
Ant McWatt comments:
Firstly, I think Pirsig’s paragraph here is primarily referring to criminals
within a particular society (where there is some agreement concerning what
constitutes criminal behaviour) rather than referring to inter-societal
conflicts which require more analysis of what constitutes criminality. As
some Muslim cultures perceive Blair and Bush as war criminals while the
latter’s capitalist culture perceives certain Fundamentalist Muslims as
criminals (who would be considered as freedom fighters within their own
culture), there is little point in referring to such paragraphs from LILA to
justify behaviour for either side. Both sides just see the other side as
deviant and justify their subsequent behaviour accordingly.
Actually - in this context - I agree with both sides and think – ideally –
that all the extreme elements of the parties involved need to be removed
from the global scene politically. I think this would be the best way to
facilitate world peace and harmony. The most rational option to achieve
this entails argument and debate because either side – being cultures rather
than individual criminals - are not going to be beaten militarily. For
instance, you could assassinate a conservative Western leader or a Bin Laden
and there would just be another biological body (with the same cultural
values) to replace them. The more rational option – living in just the one
world where we are all stuck together in the same big boat - is to convince
Westerners not to support actions such as the Iraqi occupation and to put
pressure on the Muslim community to eradicate the more extreme
fundamentalist ideas and behaviour which presently exists within it.
Sam stated July 26th 2005:
Ant and Mark objected to Platt's use of this passage to justify talk of
'biological terrorism', by which Platt meant (I interpret) human actions
motivated by pre-social values. I suspect Platt particularly had in mind the
biological pleasures associated with (some) Muslim conceptions of the
afterlife.
Ant McWatt comments:
Firstly, read the above paragraph of Platt’s which concerned me, more
carefully, Sam. Platt doesn’t state “biological terrorism”, he states
“biological terrorist” and it is this latter type of terminology I am
vehemently opposed to in the context of the MOQ. As I noted to Platt
before, “biological terrorist” has the misleading connotation that
“terrorists” are less than human and that as such they can be literally
treated on the same level as germs or a cancer growth. That the possibility
that they may have social or intellectual concerns worth taking account of
(even within their own cultural perspective) can be conveniently ignored.
That is the error that happened in Northern Ireland and it was only when men
of good will (such as John Hume) sat down with their political enemies and
discussed and analysed each other’s concerns carefully that peace (and
therefore prosperity) returned to the region. The reasons for behaviour
must be analysed rationally before remedial action is taken so a psychotic
serial killer who acts violently is treated differently from a soldier who
acts violently but from a sincere belief that he’s defending a worthwhile
cause such as freedom.
In his PhD acceptance speech, Hume also pointed to the European Union as an
example of what could be done on a worldwide basis as regards peace,
valuable minor cultural differences and mutual prosperity. He recalled
standing on a bridge between France and Germany in the 1960s (watching
French and German people peacefully go about their business) and thinking
that just twenty years beforehand that these same people were killing each
other. This is the incentive that gave him the idea to set up a political
party in the 1970s dedicated to achieving peace in Northern Ireland through
dialogue. I also think that such a process (as found in the European Union)
is also the best way we will eventually achieve world peace.
Finally, while I do agree with Sam to some extent that the key issue is
deciding which is the better society (i.e. which society best contributes to
the evolution of life), I would rather rephrase it in less black and white
terms, and see it as a process as indicated in Northrop’s and Pirsig’s work
as rationally deciding what elements from all the major cultures we would
like to use –– as one global community – to improve our quality of life in
the future. At the bottom line (as indicated in Buddhism and Taoism) there
is no “us and them” (whoever and whatever “us and them” are) but just an
“us”.
Best wishes,
Anthony.
P.S. Platt, many thanks for your kind words in your July 25th post to me.
Horse, Dave Buchanan, Gavin, Paul Turner and myself did toast you in a
Liverpool pub even though we disagree with you politically.
.
.
_________________________________________________________________
It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger 7.0 today!
http://messenger.msn.co.uk
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 Jul 27 2005 - 20:47:42 BST