Re: MD Undeniable Facts

From: johnny moral (
Date: Thu Apr 24 2003 - 22:03:14 BST

  • Next message: Elizaphanian: "Re: MD Undeniable Facts"

    Hi Platt,

    >Not many people I know "fetishize DQ." Most are stuck in familiar
    >patterns and enjoy their routines.

    There is a growing trend to consider morality bad, and things that break
    morality as good. People who enjoy their routines are mocked, as I believe
    you are doing right there. Some routines are better to be stuck in than

    >To question the "shoulds" of the prevailing culture is the key to a better
    >life. History proves that again and again, beginning with "Why should I
    >not eat this apple?"

    That was the Original Sin, the first immoral act, and according to the
    story, life was better before that, now we have toil, pain, etc. The
    "shoulds" should be followed, not questioned. The prevailing culture wants
    a better life as much as anyone, and there are all sorts of moral mechanisms
    to achieve that without wholesale abandonment of morality in general.

    > > >OK, what's the "law of art?"
    > >
    > > Get laid, be cool, express yourself, etc, all in some sort of artful
    > > balance. Do what artists should do.
    >"Get laid" is an important part of the code of art? That's a new one on
    >me. I missed my calling.

    Pirsig of course said it was more like innovate and create beauty or
    something, but he was just trying to get laid.

    >So the universe was created from an "expectation of meaning." That's a
    >new one on me, too.

    I know you just answered this, but where do you feel the universe came from
    again? And why?

    > > How could you not be a determinist? It is unreasonable.
    >There's nothing reasonable about the effect Rachmaninov's 3rd piano
    >concerto has on me.

    I hate to shatter your illusion, but it is entirely reasonable. You like
    Rachmaninov and not Eminem for REASONS. I don't know what they are, you
    don't even know what they are, but they are there. Perhaps it's best not to
    investigate what they are, it doesn't really matter. But something about
    your circumstances growing up and becoming who you are you today makes the
    3rd piano concerto especially effectual on you. If it was just something
    about the 3rd PC, then everyone would share the same reaction to it.

    > > > > Why does not every new record strike us as great, then?
    > > >
    > > >Because not every new record is any good.
    > >
    > > Based on static patterns, obviously, right?
    >Wrong. Based on your innate sense of beauty whose "pattern" has yet
    >to be discovered. Otherwise, every painting would be a Rembrandt.

    Huh? What is the sense of beauty innate to? The only paintings that are
    Rembrandts are the ones that were produced by the static patterns that were
    Rembrandt. We like them if they agree with our static patterns, which we
    mostly share, but not all of us do, some of us don't like Rembrandt or think
    they is any good at all, we like Paul Klee much more. I won't accept that
    there is just some mystical innate beauty just because you refuse to
    investigate the source of it.

    >DQ is always "to you."

    And so is SQ, actually. But since we emerged from static patterns and are
    brought up to believe similar things by the static patterns that were here
    "before" us, we tend to continue to see patterns pretty similarly and share

    > > >Your whole philosophy boils down to, "There's nothing new under the
    > > >sun."
    > >
    > > There is nothing new under the sun.
    >So, I was right.

    Basically, I am saying that this is a reasonable universe. Everything
    happens for a reason. New things, if all were known, would be entirely

    > > > > What my metaphics precludes is unreason.
    > > >
    > > >What your metaphysics precludes is evolution.
    > >
    > > How so? Evolution is itself a static pattern and all patterns have been
    > > changing and evolving constantly as they interact with others.
    >It's the little word "interact" that's the key. Why interact? Why not just
    >stay the same? That would be the most moral from your point of view
    >wouldn't it?

    Everything is patterns interacting. There are no isolated patterns. A bird
    attempts to do its pattern, a worm attempts to do its. Through it all,
    oxygen and gravity are doing their pattern, interacting with birds and
    worms. All patterns tend to maintain their pattern, because it is good when
    they do, but in the course of trying to do their pattern, other patterns get
    thwarted. If they start getting thrawrted all the time, they stop being
    patterns, or they change.

    >Oh, oh. Enter good old stale, static left-wing political thinking.

    Do you deny you've been marketed to?

    >I'm all for eliminating taxes. I never heard a liberal say that. :-)

    I'm actually not for eliminating taxes, just changing where they come from.
    Instead of income tax, I like luxury taxes, large sales taxes on computers
    and consumer electronics and cars and property and furniture of like 30%.
    And I like the idea of a national sales tax that would be about the same as
    the 2-3% that credit card companies skim off all our transactions with
    stores. We should get that money, not First USA shareholders and
    executives, so lets eliminate their function by nationalizing the banking
    network infrastructure. They had their day, now it is time for the open
    source community to really do something useful.

    I imagine a public network that would transfer the money out of the buyers
    account and into a government escrow account for a set period of time and
    then, minus the sales tax, into the sellers account (both the buyers account
    and the sellers account could be accounts in this public database, no one
    would need to have a bank anymore). All transactions would securely and
    privately go through this network, so that escrow account would be a huge
    rainy day fund. Car and house payments would sit in the account for a few
    days before being transferred to the sellers account, small items like
    household goods would sit for a few hours. It's hard to know what could be
    done with the trillions of dollars that would be available in that fund,
    perhaps money could be loaned for tuition and housing from this fund at no


    MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.

    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 : Thu Apr 24 2003 - 22:03:54 BST