PLATT:
So I stand on the beginning ground of the axiom, “Some things are
better than others” and say that from this ground, all moral
problems and ultimately their solutions arise. Does anyone agree?
Can we all accept that as a basic starting point for discussions
about morality?
ROG:
Good is a noun. The ultimate noun is an adjective. Reality is, in essence,
pure value. It isn't things, it is an enless dynamic stream of value events.
I think the efforts to define a moral compass or apply it to real world
solutions seems caught in the static truth trap. The problem with solving a
moral dilemma is that to define the dilemma we first objectify it and build
static models of it. We then apply some static solution to the static
problem.
The MOQ approach is to continuously redefine and undefine the problem.
Approach it from a thousand directions and apply a thousand and one
solutions. Test these, retest. Redefine the problem. Keep what works,
throw out what doesn't. Every once in a while try out what already proved
unsuccessful and see if the problem has now given you new opportunities to
try new twists on the old. And tomorrow, as you wake, intuit whether value
has been maximized. You will find it hasn't, so it is time to start anew.
Sorry if this seems flippant, but this really is my take on the issue. The
MOQ doesn't so much offer solutions as it offers a method. And that method
itself is dynamic....as someone else already said....it is a lot like a real
compass.
Rog
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:15 BST