From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Wed Jun 09 2004 - 05:24:15 BST
Dear Johnny,
You wrote 7 Jun 2004 17:49:49 +0000:
'I've long championed the original and still to my mind correct definition
of morality as being "whatever most people do". As in "the mores" of a
society. ... Morality's relation to ethics or objectively good behavior is
thus only tangential, predicated on a shared belief that most of us are good
and ethical. ... How this relates to polling is very interesting, because in
reality, what we feel is moral is not necessarily an accurate sampling of
what most people do, but is only what we think most people do. ... If we
think most people cheat, then we think it is moral, it is the expected
behavior, and we are MUCH more likely to cheat ourselves. ... If we think
most people cheat, then we think it is moral, it is the expected behavior,
and we are MUCH more likely to cheat ourselves. ... Putting "DQ" on a
pedestal and excoriating existing patterns of course is also immoral, though
those here who believe that DQ is the source of morality and all that is
good will of course object.'
This is logically untenable and inconsistent with the MoQ as I understand
it.
It is logically untenable because of an implied paradox: How can it be
immoral that most people cheat if morality is defined as "whatever most
people do"?? Implicitly you are applying another definition that you say you
do! And putting "DQ" highest is what most people do on this list, than
THAT's the moral thing to do (according to your definition, but not to
you)...
Explanation of its inconsistence with the MoQ (at least my version of it)
requires a discussion of definitions of morality:
The original definition of morality is a definition of intellectual patterns
of value that describe the social patterns of value that keep together
society. It is indeed derives from "mores", "what most people do": the
pattern of 'normal' and thus 'normative' behaviour. Originally such
intellectual patterns of value (the 'moralities' of societies) supported
societies that were threatened with degeneration, because relatively few
people were NOT doing anymore what others had always done, i.e. were
breaking those social patterns of value.
The original definition is not the correct definition any more. It has
become "ideas about what people should do" (regardless of what most people
do). It is a definition of intellectual patterns of value that do not
necessarily describe social patterns of value, but that rather prescribes
them, that tries to change them. It is a definition of a 4th level
phenomenon.
The definition of morality in the MoQ is broader than that in normal
parlance. It is broadened to include 'morality' at the inorganic,
biological, social and intellectual levels, instead of only at the
intellectual level.
Given the lack of logic in your post and its inconsistency with the MoQ I
find it impossible to comment on your idea that polls produce stimulate
immorality and are thus immoral themselves (if I understood it correctly).
With friendly greetings,
Wim
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 Jun 09 2004 - 05:26:07 BST