----- Original Message -----
From: Ian J Greely <Ian@tirnanog.org>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 12:13 PM
Subject: Re: MD Rambling Madmen... Well here's my ramble.
> On Wed, 14 Jun 2000 02:35:08 EDT, you wrote:
>
> >Hi All
> >
> >IAN:
> ><some snipped>
> >If we really only have three-score years and ten who
> >the hell wants to spend that much of it greasy, sweaty and pissing
> >everyone around them off?
> >
> >JON:
> >
> >I'm unclear what you mean by this. Nobody really wants to spend their
life
> >greasy, sweaty, and pissing everyone around them off. But look at
history.
> >Certain people at certain times have felt morally compelled to go through
> >life unpleasantly in order to put a stop to some immoral aspect of their
> >society. The usual examples: Jesus, Martin Luther King, etc. If the
Nazi's
> >had conquered the world, would it be right for the average citizen to
ignore
> >the abundant immorality, to keep from getting sweaty or pissing anybody
off?
> >And what if slavery was still legal in America (and not only legal, but
> >considered acceptable by the majority of the populace)? Should the person
in
> >this hypothetical society just be good and not risk a lifetime of pissing
> >people off?
>
> It's the whole quality/morality/effect schema. Or more relevantly to
> where I am now could we/can we/should we...
>
> I actually agree with you assesment above of the morality of these
> events. Yet it is evident that anything can be done with quality. This
> does not mean that it should be done.
>
> My point was that the damage Phaedrus causes (as told by the narrator)
> is warranted. The narrator causes more damage and there is no value to
> it other than getting out of the glass door... Phaedrus wishes to do
> something and will sweat to this end. The Narrator espouses this a
> worthy goal in and of itself. He's WRONG.
>
> "Wax on Wax off Daniel san"
>
> There was a pattern to what occured in Germany during the national
> socialist period. It starts with elevating animals to having the same
> rights as humans. Once you have made this IMMORAL (IMO) step the
> action of treating people as animals becomes a much smaller step.
>
> Human life is SACRED.
> Animal life is not SACRED.
>
> >
> >Everything is sacred. Morality has everything. That does NOT mean
everything
> >has equal value, or zero value.
> This is a nonsense. In a language sense. What you are effectively
> saying is that the word sacred is meaningless and therefore you can
> insert your own definition.
>
> My dictionary gives several definitions all of which relate
> exclusively to a deity or a religious act. It is obviously nonsensical
> to suggest that *everything* fits the meaning of this word.
>
> I'm not merely being pedantic. To suggest that because you can make
> anything sacred, everything is sacred is to debase the very concept of
> something being sacred. It's a heresy in most western religions. In
> fact as I recall most of the Buddist texts I have read had words about
> not profaining the texts with association with more mundane
> materials...
>
> Because I can love ANY person does not mean that EVERY person is
> loved. It's a non sequitur.
>
> >Of course, we must consider certain aspects
> >of life more important than others. That's common sense. Depends on who
you
> >are and where you are. But no matter who you are, or where you are,
Morality
> >has you, and it has where.
>
> Well I'm reading Huck Finn at the moment. There is a passage in it
> where Twain writes of the moral dilema faced by Huck when the slave he
> is running with nears his goal. Huck's dilema is that it's wrong for
> him to be involved in separating someone from their rightful property
> (namely a slave.) I hadn't read anything written in this perspective
> before and found it somewhat illuminating. Even for your most belicose
> racist the idea that it is morally *correct* to own another human
> being is now *seen* as utterly insuportable. Certainly I have never
> met anybody who would suggest that they had a right to own someone
> else as "property" (though I have met many who treat those they love
> with much the same effect.)
>
>
> regards,
> Ian
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:44 BST