Glen, Jon
Sorry to butt in but I couldn't overlook this:
Glenn
> The dials must detect it. MOQ, which is based on empiricism, demands this as
> well. Trouble is, according to MOQ, morals (DQ) are undefinable - they're
> not any kind of thing that can be detected by an instrument.
3WD
The MoQ is based on "radical" empiricism and while it does says that
Dynamic Quality and Quality are undefinable (but knowable) to say that
it does not "define" values or morals is quite a stretch. And if your
saying that the MoQ says values or morals are, "not any kind of thing
that can be detected by an instrument" your just plain wrong. In his
causation discussion ( "A values precondition B") he says just the
opposite. That values ( organic or inorganic) is exactly what all
scientific instruments are detecting. And to further confuse, these
"detected" or "observed" organic and inorganic values are inexorably
intertwined with the social and intellectual values, morals, or laws of
the observer however much science would like this not to be.
So yes as you suggests, at the level of scientific values this seem to
be just a "renaming", but it is powerful for same reason that converting
fractions to a common denominator in mathematic is. It allows us to
integrate, however clumsily, into the "scientific formulas" values
from the social and intellectual levels which have been there all along
but had previously had been discounted as having little or no affect on
the observations, conclusions, and the subsequent choices and decisions.
3WD
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:45 BST