>Doesn't escape the fact that some ideas acting at the intellectual level are plain simply bloody stupid because of the negative >feedback on the social levels. And I mean "bloody" in bodily fluid sense.
It's true that intellectual patterns, especially in a dominant position, can work to destroy the lower level social patterns. In Lila, Pirsig writes about how the current dominant "amoral" SOM intellectual patterns have taken the side of biology in the conflict of social patterns with biological patterns, and thus have caused tremendous social destruction.
However, even so, social patterns have no right to repress intellectual patterns of any kind, even if they are "stupid." It is immoral for them to do so. It is probable that religious authorities of Galileo's time considered his ideas regarding the solar system to be "stupid." It is highly likely that many current day religious and government figures consider the Metaphysics of Quality to be "stupid." The freedom of speech and other human rights were created to protect all intellectual patterns, both stupid and smart, from immoral repression by lower level social patterns. It's often the "stupid" intellectual patterns that turn out to be smart later.
What will and should happen instead is that SOM - dominated intellectual patterns will be replaced by MOQ intellectual patterns because they are better, i.e. they have higher intellectual quality. MOQ intellectual patterns can recognize the difference between conflicts of social patterns with biological patterns and conflicts of intellectual patterns with social patterns and will take the side of society in its effort to control and repress biology. When this happens, the social destruction caused by the dominant SOM intellectual patterns will be alleviated.
Regards,
-- Sriram
----- Original Message -----
From: hamishtmuirhead
To: moq_discuss@moq.org
Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2002 6:44 PM
Subject: Re: MD Pim Fortuyn
Doesn't escape the fact that some ideas acting at the intellectual level are plain simply bloody stupid because of the negative feedback on the social levels. And I mean "bloody" in bodily fluid sense.
sriram25@comcast.net wrote:
The statement that it is more moral for an idea to kill a society than for asociety to kill an idea refers to the fact that intellectual patterns ofvalue are morally superior to social patterns of value according to the moq.For example, it was immoral for the Catholic clergy and the Inquisition toforce Galileo to recant his intellectual ideas regarding the solar systemand earth's place in it. That was a lower form of social value devouring ahigher form of intellectual value and thus immoral. Subsequently, afterGalileo's intellectual ideas were adopted by Copernicus and others, much ofthe social patterns of the medieval clergy and especially the Inquisitionwere destroyed, and this was a moral development. Similarly, the heresytrials that Hobbes and other early Renaissance philosophers were subjectedto were immoral attempts of social patterns represented by Church andgovernment authorities attempting to suppress
the intellectual patternsrepresented by the renaissance philosophers. It was these immoral attemptsthat led to freedom of speech rights now taken for granted in most Westerndemocracies to protect intellectual patterns from being immorally destroyedby lower level social patterns.Regards,-- Sriram----- Original Message -----From: "Joćo Correia da Silva" <joao.silva@optimus.pt>To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 8:44 AMSubject: RE: MD Pim Fortuyn
Hi Bo & all,JOAO
1. Sometimes an idea (intellectual level) can transform the social level in a way that makes it "of less quality" and more static. The victory of the social level value would have been better (of higher quality). Right?
BO
Wrong in my opinion! Ideas as intellectual patterns is problematic. For example, the "idea" to introduce torture of prisoners isn't
intellectual
value at all, but very much a social such. It may sound strange to call this a value, but the general social "urge" is for the individuals to conform, and from that point of view no treatment is too severe for dissenters.
JOAOI am questioning the whole of the statement (this came to me after Sam'sinitial post):"It is moral for an idea to kill a society" (Lila)I was trying to establish its boundaries, but still couln't make it.Thinking of an idea like "torture of prisioners.." as social value thatshouldn't prevail over intellectual value may be helpful. I was thinking
of
ideas as intellectual patterns that acted upon intellectual and socialpatterns.JOAO
The idea that we are in a war against terror has transformed thesocial level, decreasing its quality and making it more static. Don't
you
agree?
BO
The social LEVEL can't be transformed, it's as stable as the bed-rock itself, but the idea that we are at war has shifted Western focus in a more social direction. This shift may be called a decrease of quality
as
it is a move to a lower static latch.
JOAO"Be the change that you want to see in the world" - GandhiHe seems to think otherwise ;)Maybe we are saying the same thing. I meant the social static patterns
(that
changed significantly after sept11 - the decreasing freedom of expressionand the advance of the far-right in Europe worry me).Thanks for your comments,JoaoMOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.orgMail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.netTo unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.orgMail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.netTo 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@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 - 16:02:15 BST