Re: Ham; Re: MD Is Morality Relative?

Date: Wed Dec 08 2004 - 22:00:40 GMT

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "Re: MD The Quality of Capitalism?"

    In a message dated 12/8/04 7:50:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, writes:

    We may be at odds about the existence of absolutes, but I absolutely agree
    with your take on art. Many times I've written to the forum about the
    importance of the subject. So it's great to have a fellow member believing
    as I do that one must pursue beauty in all endeavor. As for beauty's
    relationship to the MOQ, the French novelist Flaubert wrote, "That which
    is beautiful is moral, that is all, nothing more."

    Hi Platt,
    Understand that I am at odds with myself about the existence of absolutes as
    well, but I kinda like myself, so it doesn't change my abilities to see
    things clearly. I just know there are those who do not reason as I do that
    absolutes are. If it is not fully accepted, then it can't be an absolute, and I
    must look at their side as well. If I claim it is an absolute, this may be more
    a prejudice to my beliefs as represented by my culture, which would deny the
    ability of another culture's opinion to infiltrate my own safe little world.
    I have faced so many absolutes in my life, just to find it is not an
    absolute at all, that I must be opened to the idea that there are no absolutes, and
    that anything is possible; even the idea that the mind can change the object
    to where it was not what it was when I thought of it as an absolute.
    If we entered into a dialogue of reason, and took one thing after another as
    absolute or not absolute, then you would win the argument -- Western reason
    can only show there are absolutes. The thing is, reason did not show the earth
     to be round until evidence came to pass that it was, beyond the reasoning of
     those who knew the earth to be flat.
    We may have advanced by leaps and bounds in our ability to reason, but I
    would propose we are still in our infancy to all we will discover in the future.
    Is what we are doing on this computer not a form of Dynamic Quality that
    would have not been believed at one time? We can talk to each other in real time
    (or close enough) while seeing an image on a screen of each other. This was
    once in the realm of science fiction.
    For some reason, positive thinking changes those things around you, and can
    even cure diseases. Until I know why this is, I cannot claim that those who
    believe that the world we live in is only an illusion are absolutely wrong. I
    believe that it is possible that reality is only limited to the imagination.
    As far as everything being art? To me that is so simple that I could say it
    lies in the realm of being an absolute. It is either low Quality art, or high
    Quality art. No action can be anything other, and an action that creates
    beauty can only come from a skillful artist, whether it is the Theory of
    Relativity or tying your shoe.
    Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and so it seems philosophy, or even

    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Dec 08 2004 - 22:04:48 GMT