Hi Struan, Rog, Lith, Platt, Horse, and all you other "evil doers"!
Struan:
> This is all very well so long as we realise that the 'perceived evil' is
> from DQ's point of view. DQ is good and SQ is evil only according to
> itself which is of course very different from evil in the sense of human
> morality, or as a universal reality, ( I can feel a contribution from Ken
> coming here ). This leads on to Roger's point about evil being conflict
> between value forces.
For once, I think my trusty dictionary got it right.
Evil: The *quality* of being morally bad or wrong.
Wow! What a statement for Webster to make! Was he a closet MOQist?
Well, I guess I can't make that claim stick. Anyway, as I see it, in
the static realm evil is just as relative as good. What's good for
one level can be evil for another, and most types of evil can be
explained that way once you think about it for a while.
What I'm still working on, though, is how to explain aberrations.
You know, the crazy nut with the lust for blood. This is a big
problem. What's going on with the person who happens to just enjoy
killing? Seems like this kind of person represents a mistake at the
biological level (genes), the social level (very poor parenting), or
a mistake at the intellectual level. In any event, my first stab at
it (pardon the pun) looks like evil could be the embodiment of a
MISTAKE.
Who said the march toward DQ was in a straight line? Looked at from
one direction, the last survivors of a species nearing extinction
would probably view the entire universe as evil, bent on destroying
their kind (assuming they had the intellect with which to discern
evil in the first place). On the other hand, the truly evil person
in our society is a mistake, an aberration from the normal level of
human quality - standing behind the door when compassion was passed
out. Maybe that's what it is. Evil existing when an individual, or
a society loses something that had previously been statically latched
into the species and the society.
Dynamic Quality is not perfect, and evolution towards it is likely to
take many wrong turns along the way. There's no blueprint. So I
agree with Struan and Roger that it's probably not a separate
reality, just the mistakes that happen along the road to Dynamic
Quality. Overall, the march is toward the Dynamic Good. If that
were not so there would be evil everywhere - and it's not. The Good
is the objective, but the evil sometimes happens along the way.
Best Wishes,
Mary
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 - 16:02:49 BST