Hi Lilacs,
I know this is irrational, but when I read what Magnus wrote, I
considered withdrawing from any further discussion with him. All my
thoughts are clouded by this:-
MAGNUS
>> >Homo sapiens killed the other race (the Neanderthals)
>> >because they could, and it was moral....
JONATHAN
>> By this logic, the Holocaust was moral! Sorry Magnus, I reject that
>> outright.
>
MAGNUS
>Hold your horses! Who said the Jewish people was another race?
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What difference does it make? What's going on with you Magnus!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>Not quite, DQ may cause immoral events. But since the alternative
>is a static and degenerate world, it's more moral with DQ than
>without. I'd say the Holocaust was such an event.
Phew. Finally I see that Magnus does recognise that the Holocaust was
immoral. I'm still worried though - I think we should change the world
so that another Holocaust is impossible.
Magnus appears to disagree.
Now that's off my chest, let me continue...
>> A question to Magnus. Is there any type of thought that is not
IntPoV?
>
MAGNUS
>I don't think so. I said that all thoughts are IntPoVs, I didn't say
>that all IntPoVs are thoughts.
>
Please explain what other IntPoVs there are. Do you mean meditation
etc.?
JONATHAN
>> I put human morality where it always was. MAN IS THE MEASURE.
>> That's the whole Quality idea. The "codes" are a product of morality,
>> not the other way round.
>
>I disagree. That's not the Quality idea. Morality, reality and Quality
>were around long before man entered the stage, and will be around long
>after we're gone.
We never did have that monthly topic about time.
I would suggest that time itself is a pattern perceived by Man.
In this context, Magnus's statement doesn't mean much.
JONATHAN
>> "Rigel morality" puts codes first. Rigel condemns Pirsig for
>> violating a code.
>
>But those codes have nothing to do with reality.
>
Magnus, I think we have very different ideas of what constitutes
reality.
Those codes are perfectly real. "Real" is one of the most misused words
in the English language, and frequently confused for "true". When my son
asked if the story I told him was "real" (his word), I said YES. All
stories are REAL and all codes are REAL and any mathematical equation I
care to write is REAL.
But they are not all good, and some are inconsistent with other patterns
we value (i.e. FALSE).
Science confuses "real" and "true".
I have some more comments related to this, but they fit the "mysticism"
thread more, so I'll continue in a separate post.
Regards to all,
Jonathan
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:44 BST