Well Rick, we are very far.....
> > RICK
> > > But I
> > > believe his ultimate point is that the morality of an individual
> execution
> > > depends on the level of threat a criminal poses to the social
structure,
> > > which in turn depends on the stability of that social structure.
> >
> MARCO
> > Well, not the morality, I'd say, just a tendency: a less stable social
> > structure tends to be less moral towards its citizens.
>
> RICK
> I don't think so. I think a less stable society has less options. If the
> choice for a society is execution of criminals or self-destruction, the
> society would be justified in the executions.
> MARCO
> This is true for
> > capital punishment as well as for the other human rights. Curbing human
> > rights is an immoral shortcut to stability.
>
> RICK
> Right. It's immoral as a SHORTCUT. But not if it's the only path. Don't
> confuse acting out of convenience with acting out of necessity.
M
No path is the only path. There is always the option to change towards DQ. A
society defending the status quo killing individuals probably just doesn't
want to change. An idea, actually, doesn't kill society. It just changes it.
> > RICK
> > > Pirsig says it is generally immoral for society to kill a criminal
> because
> > > he still a potential source of ideas. Even a prisoner who wants to
die
> is
> > a
> > > potential source of ideas. I can't think of any reason it would be
any
> > more
> > > moral for him to kill himself (and destroy a source of ideas) than it
> > would
> > > be for society to do so.
>
> MARCO
> > Suicide is not a society killing a source of ideas. It is an idea
killing
> > its own source.
>
> RICK
> No. A human personality is a social pattern (remember Marco, in the MOQ
> 'society' is contra-biology, not contra-individual.
M
A human personality is a social pattern? A human personality is four-level.
The idea "I want to die" is an idea. Of course it is not independent of the
lower levels, nevertheless it is an idea.
> > > RICK
> > > ... barring a real
> > > threat to the social structure itself, it is immoral to prematurely
end,
> > or
> > > possibly even fail to preserve, any potential source of ideas (there
may
> > be
> > > interesting implications for abortion politics here).
> >
> MARCO
> > But again it is not society that performs abortion. It is the free
choice
> of
> > the mother.
>
> RICK
> Again, the mother is social pattern, not an intellectual one. Her choice
to
> eliminate a potential source of ideas is no more moral than if it were
made
> the society at large.
M
Again, I can't follow this point that the mother is a social pattern. An
individual choice is an idea.
> MARCO
> Let's remember that when abortion was formally banned, it was
> > nevertheless committed. And it's a fact that legal abortion kills less
> than
> > illegal abortion.
>
> RICK
> But this is an argument about practicality, not morality.
M
I'm Pragmatist? That's good! This argument was anyway about the social
options we have. Banning abortion doesn't work.
> MARCO
> I think it is immoral to destroy a "source of ideas", unless the
> > pregnancy is a risk for the mother herself.
>
> RICK
> And what if only one could be saved? Would it be more moral to save the
> baby at the mother's expense? Or the mother at the baby's expense?
>
> MARCO
> The question is "when" is it
> > possible to talk of "source of ideas"? Fetus? Embryo?
>
> RICK
> This argument usually centers around when it is possible to talk about a
> 'pre-born' as being "alive". But don't think that anyone would argue that
a
> fetus isn't a POTENTIAL life, or a POTENTIAL source of ideas. For our
> purposes, it's the latter that is controlling. A fetus is potential
source
> of ideas, so Intellect won't let it be morally destroyed unless it
(somehow)
> constitutes a direct threat to the social structure.
>
> MARCO
> Following this line it
> > comes out that even sexual abstinence is immoral!
>
> RICK
> No. The MOQ doesn't say it's immoral to fail to bring into being new
> sources of Intellect. Only to destroy them.
"Destroying a potential" IS "preventing". You have to sketch a borderline,
or even a cat is a potential source of ideas as in a billion years could
evolve into something intelligent.
Sorry for my pragmatism.
Marco
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 - 16:01:58 BST