Hi LilaQs all,
It seems that everyone else is jumping in, so let me add my Euro
0.017.
David's piece about the hurricane reminded me about my own comments
about
patterns and pattern breakers. Static patterns implies some sort of
stable equilibrium.
If you stand a pencil on its flat end, it is in stable equilibirium. It
still has the POTENTIAL to fall down, but without disturbance, that
potential will never be REALised. Realisation requires an ACTIVE
disturbance to initially tilt the pencil away from its original
equilibirum to allow it to reach a new one.
Pushing things away from equilibrium means pushing against natural
potential. The gain is in realisation of new potential. It's a game of
initial cost vs. payoff. Pirsig talked about this in one of the novels,
but I couldn't find the passage again.
Viewed on its own, this initial cost of pushing against the natural
direction is immoral. However, as part of the overall picture, it is
offset by subsequent gain. This was the story of Zuni. Was the brujo's
behaviour moral? I'd say it is a question of his motivation. We don't
know why he initially engaged in rebellious behaviour. Maybe it was
frivilous. Suppose the year is 1910, and some young German thug has just
stabbed a young Adolf Shickelgruber in a back alley? Is his action any
more moral than his modern counterpart? I would argue that to do
something "wrong" in isolation is immoral, but to do it to enable a
greater good is moral. That's the justification one can give to the
riots against the Vietnam war. The short term cost (measured
lawlessness) was considered to be outweighed by the potential gain.
I believe that we can very easily apply a similar analysis to the
current Clinton saga, by assessing overall costs and potential gains. I
gather that most Americans think Clinton a valuable president, so his
demise would be a clear cost. However, there are people who think that
this cost is worth paying because it will have a positive long-term
effect on the Presidency. I don't necessarily agree with this view, but
think it is consistent with morality.
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 - 16:02:49 BST