From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sat Dec 11 2004 - 01:12:51 GMT
Good evening Arlo,
P:
> > They are dedicated to destroying our free society, replacing it with a
> > totalitarian society.
A:
> Here you seem to agree that it is a clash of static social values, with the
> use of biological force as a tool (they initiate (supposedly) with it, and
> we respond with it). Yes?
Yes. Terrorists are biological "tools" of a radical element in Muslim
society. As Pirsig says, you meet biological force with force.
> > Physical violence (murder) threatens the social fabric. Totalitarian
> > societies depend on physical violence, i.e., biological terrorism, to
> > survive.
>
> OK, again, biological force is a weapon of static social patterns in
> conflict. Or used by the police (either OUR police or THEIR police) to
> enforce static social patterns.
>
> Do you not feel that our society depends on the implied threat of physical
> violence to survive? If we did not have laws, punishment, and imprisonment,
> wouldn't our society disintegrate? Hell, isn't "capital punishment" an
> example of our society using physical violence to survive? Isn't that the
> purpose of the laws? So I would accept the argument that "totalitarian
> societies depend on a much greater, and more direct use of, physical
> violence, i.e., biological "force", to survive compared to our society. But
> to imply that our society (or ANY society) makes NO USE of physical
> violence (or the implied threat of physical violence) runs counter to the
> enforcement of any social code. Yes or no?
Yes. Societies are threatened both internally and externally by biological
forces. Regardless of the source, to survive a society must meet force
with force.
> Also, how is the US's historical behavior in Chile (for one specific
> example), NOT a counter example of our society using biological force to
> ensure the survivial of totalitarian social patterns? Does our use of
> biological force, what many in Chile and across the globe see as
> "terrorism", not count?
Last time I looked, Chile was a democratic republic. Is that a problem?
> > Do you think all social patterns are morally equal, that a free society >
> > is
> as good as a totalitarian society? I hope not.
>
> Not at all (I am saddened that you did not know this by now), and I am
> beginning to think that "Flow" (Csikszentmihalyi) is a very interesting
> (and high quality) way to think about comparing static social patterns.
> Using this as a measure, for example, I would argue that totalitarian
> societies are less moral than democracies, not simply because of their
> economic marketplace structure, but because their social patterns leave
> less opportunity for its citizens to engage in "flow" activies.
Whole-heartedly agree. "Flow" describes what it's like to be influenced by
DQ. I think Csikszentmihalyi, Maslow and Pirsig make a great team. If
everyone absorbed and tried to live by what this trio say, many problems
would be eliminated.
> But, "flow" aside, here again you seem to agree that this is a clash of
> static social patterns, and that biological force is a weapon being
> employed (by both sides) in this conflict. No?
Yes. I would simply add that a society has the moral right to defend
itself from biological forces threatened or initiated against it from
within or without. Agree?
Best,
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Dec 11 2004 - 02:10:00 GMT