Hugo Fjelsted Alroe (alroe@vip.cybercity.dk)
Wed, 19 Nov 1997 19:05:14 +0100
Hugo:
>> Be that as it may, my short answer to your question is that Pirsig's
>> moral says that it is 'right' for free will to arise in the course of
>> evolution. I am not sure it sayes anything on the rights or wrongs
>> involved in different exercises of free will.
Mark:
>Morals, according to Pirsig, have everything to say about the rights or
>wrongs in the different exercises of free will.
>
>The hierarchy of values is an ordering of morals. Biological exercises
>of free will are immoral when they negatively affect social values.
>Thus it is moral to imprison a rapist, but imprisoning a political
>dissident is immoral. Murder is immoral in any context and so on.
Mark, I am not sure I understand you here. Are you saying that the moral
codes of Pirsig's value levels fulfills the role as a working moral for us
humans?
And I am not sure I understand your examples, 'murder is immoral in any
context', does that mean that killing in defence of yourself or your kin is
immoral?
And we do in fact imprison political dissidents of the more insisting kind,
take for instance Rote Arme Fraktion in Germany a while ago, or the Nazi's
of today - how do we decide, using the moral of Pirsig, when dissidents are
to be controlled?
I am not altogether against what you are saying, we have discussed ethics
on LS before, and I agree that there is a new foundation for ethics in MoQ.
I am just not sure it is quite as simple as your answer above suggests.
Could you elaborate a little?
Hugo
-- post message - mailto:skwok@spark.net.hk unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:14 CEST