Hi Rick:
RICK:
>I sense that you are a sporting gentlemen, so I hope you don't mind if
>I fence with you a bit on this one.....
PLATT:
I figured I would get a rise out of someone. Sure, let's fence a bit.
> RICK:
> No doubt, arguments like this have been presented here. However, I think
> your presentation is a bit of a simplification. Let me quickly present you
> with but a single example of a more accurate representation of such an
> argument --- One may argue that the MOQ generally fails to provide any real
> guidance on how to identify what level any given pattern is from. Thus,
> using the MOQ to support any argument is really as easy as characterizing
> your position as belonging to or being supported by a superior level.
> Here's a textbook example....
>
> PLATT:
> An example is the recent moral fight here in the U.S. concerning a statue
> of three firemen raising the American flag at the site of the NY Trade
> Center. The actual event depicted by the statue involved three white
> firemen....those in charge decreed that the statue should show one white,
> one black and one Hispanic firemen. One side argued it would be wrong to
> ignore/change the truth of the event. The other side argued that it would
> be wrong not to symbolize all who died in the attack by representing their
> racial diversity. The MOQ clearly decides this issue on the side of those
> who want to uphold truth. The MOQ says it's immoral for truth (an
> intellectual pattern) to be subordinated to social values (diversity) since
> that is a lower form devouring a higher one.
> RICK:
> What you have done here is commit an egregious example of the problem I
> described above. That is, you have enslaved the MOQ to support your own
> personal view of events by cloaking them in 'the Truth'. What you quite
> partisanly call "the truth of the event" is really little more than a
> concern for 'a historically accurate representation of Thomas E. Franklyn's
> famous photo". Moreover, I find it bizarre that 'the event' you focus on
> to find 'the truth' is the photo... not the disaster....
PLATT:
It is clear that the "truth of the event" I refer to is the accurate photo
(map) of three white firemen raising a flag at the site of the disaster. Do
you deny that the photo is a "true" reflection of that event and that the
event (raising the flag) symbolizes the heroism of all fire fighters? If the
picture and subsequent statue based on the picture had shown three
black firefighters, would you have wanted to change the statute just for
the sake of political correctness? Would not three black firefighters
represent all firefighters as well?
RICK:
>You want some truth??? Here's some truth... 2.7% of the city's 11,495
> firefighters are black, 3.2% are hispanic. 343 firefighters died in the
> WTC, 12 were black, 12 were hispanic. The TRUTH is that those men really
> died as heros, just like their white counterparts. The TRUTH is that the
> memorial is supposed to commemorate 'those who died', not 'those who were
> in the picture'
> You ominously suggest that ..."those in charge decreed that the statue
> should show one white, one black and one hispanic...". But why not instead
> take the point of view that... "those in charge decreed that the memorial
> to honor the fallen white, black, and hispanic firefighters should be
> modeled after the famous photo"??? From this perspective, your concern for
> 'historical accuracy' is no longer disguised as something as paramount as
> 'truth'... but revealed as mere 'trivia'.
> Now, we can move onto the real question that everyone has been debating
> (and the one I'd think the MOQ is truly concerned with). Which is, "What
> memorial would be BEST for society? An historically accurate one, or a
> racially diverse one?" I think the answer is obvious, but I won't press my
> view on you.
PLATT:
This is where your position falls off a cliff. The MOQ's canon against
subordinating truth to social values erects a solid moral wall against
tyrants who alter truth for the very reason you cite--because it "would be
best for society." History In Communist Russia was rewritten with every
change in leadership, including individuals being airbrushed out of
photographs. So I am indeed grateful that you are in no position to
press your view on me (diversity) which has not always been the case
in many countries. To have it otherwise would indeed be "egregious."
RICK:
> The truth is Platt, that many of the truths we cling to are only true
> from a certain point of view (Obi Wan? Is that you?). The truth is,
> there are an infinite variety of ways to describe the events surrounding
> the statue, and the photo, and not one single one of them is 'the TRUTH'.
> The truth is, no description is what it describes, the map is never the
> road, no characterization of events is 'the truth' (not even yours). And
> I'd expect you to know that.....
PLATT:
Since if I read you right there is no such thing as "the truth," you are
really asking me not to believe you. So I won't.
Platt
P.S. Is it true that Obi Wan is buried under a banyan tree?
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:34 BST