Re: MD A conflict of values

From: Elizaphanian (elizaphanian@tiscali.co.uk)
Date: Sun Mar 30 2003 - 17:28:37 BST

  • Next message: Elizaphanian: "Re: MD Systematic about the Sophists (Kingsley)"

    Hi David,

    > Its not that I'm picking on you, Sam, its just that I think your posts are
    > the most compelling. I was pretty much with you until the end, so I cut
    most
    > of it out. Sam quoted...

    No worries - it's something I'm grateful for responses on.

    > DMB says:
    > The military is the intrument of control over biology? Let me split hairs.
    > The military is a social level instrument and it is the social level's
    role
    > to control biology. But I'd say cops and religions enforce the moral codes
    > that control the body's appetites, while the military is like the immune
    > system for the giant itself. It grinds bodies up to protect itself. Its
    very
    > rare for a war to be waged for intellectual reasons, let alone actually
    > fought by "hordes of intellectuals". (Thanks for the hilarious image. I
    > laughed my ass off. Are you channeling Woody Allen or what?!)

    I agree with that. It was meant to be an absurd image.

    > I think that
    > the forces and values on both sides in the present war are social.

    Could you unpick that a little? In other words, would you say that the
    "imposition" of democracy was the imposition of a social value?

    > I don't
    > think Iraqis hate freedom or rights, its just that Islamic culture tends
    to
    > be offended by the quasi-pornographic nature of American culture. We've
    let
    > that biological genie out of the bottle and they reject the West for that
    > reason. The Puritans must be spinning in their graves and would most
    likely
    > reject modern Western culture for the same reasons. Hedonism. Vice.
    > Debauchery. You know, all the really fun stuff. (Of course, the West's
    > exploitive and lethal policies in the Arab world only add to the problem.
    > Thanks, Nargess.)

    You and I agree that Modernism has something seriously wrong with it (as
    indeed does anyone who buys into the MoQ - we just disagree on the details).
    Yet in this situation it is Modernism which is up against both
    Fundamentalism, but also a social pattern which - correctly, IMHO - discerns
    patterns in Modernism which it rejects -*and it is right to do so*. My point
    is really that unless the West - by which I really mean the US
    administration - realises this, then it will lose. It might win this
    particular war, it might even win the next two or three, but unless it
    changes, I think it is just storing up trouble for later - as you point out.
    That doesn't mean that Modernism deserves to lose - it has a higher DQ
    potential, clearly - it's just a worry that something very big is being
    missed by Western leaders, as a result of Modernist/SOM thinking. Which the
    MoQ has something to say about.

    What is NPR?

    Sam

    The lover of myth is in a sense the lover of wisdom, for myth is composed of
    wonders. Aristotle

    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 : Sun Mar 30 2003 - 21:03:38 BST