Hi John B., Soj:
I can't add a thing to Soj's response to your questions. He said what I
would have said, only much better. If you think of morality as "simply a
way of saying one thing is better than another" as Soj wrote, or that
"moral judgments are essentially assertions of value" as Pirsig wrote,
the questions you ask dissolve. To jump off a hot stove is a moral
judgment at the biologicial level. To admire Wilber's work is a moral
judgment at an intellectual level. To argue that terrorism is low quality
at the social level or at the biological level or both doesn't change the
moral judgment that terrorism brings low quality death to all levels for
the innocent victims and for that reason cannot be tolerated .
What I find hard to comprehend is that on one hand you are critical of
Pirsig for failing to present a workable, everyday moral guide, yet praise
Wilber for a very vague "greatest depth for greatest span" morality
which says practically nothing. I guess we'll just have to wait until his
next book. :)
I may also want to respond to your post to Roger, but my guess is his
response will again be better than anything I can can try to explain.
In the meantime I'm off on Christmas holiday. So to you John and Soj
and all MDers--very best wishes for a Merry Christmas.
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:42 BST