Hey Erin,
ERIN
>Why do older generations always look down on younger
>generations as "losing morals" or "morally bankrupt"
>and at the same time argue that world is getting better, there is
>progress, etc....
GRANDPA SIMPSON
I used to be with it. Then they changed what "it" was. Suddenly, what I
was with wasn't "it" anymore. And what was "it" seemed weird and scary to
me.
RICK
If we had a nickel for every old-timer that thinks the world is going to
hell in a handbasket we'd be wealthy. Older generations always seem to
think that the world is going crazy, that morals are fading, that fashions
have become ridiculous, that all the music their youngins are listening to
is ear-grating noise, that politicians aren't as honest as they used to
be...etc. Their problem, from an MOQ standpoint is obvious.
These are people that are deeply steeped in the static patterns that
they have grown up accustomed to. DQ changes society faster than the
generations can shed their static props. The same way Grandpa (as quoted
above) just couldn't seem to keep up with "it".
Platt's recent ruminations on Elvis point to this same phenomenon; A
generation of fans still celebrating the static patterns left in the wake of
the Dynamic "it" they remember experiencing through Elvis in their youths.
Long after the DQ was gone, the fans were still there. And the same way
they cling to their music, they cling to their morals, and manners, and
beliefs and lifestyles all the while believing that the new static patterns,
the new music, manners, morals, etc that have replaced the ones they knew,
are somehow inferior. It seems weird and scary to them.
As for why you feel that the older generations also speak of
"progress," I would hazard to guess that they are referring to technological
progress, medical progress, scientific progress, etc. My own experience has
included very few seniors who think that the world has been improving
morally or qualitatively.
ERIN
>1) At what point in history was "morals" at a peak?
>2) as times change how do you measure the change as a good or bad (or can
>you only tell in hindsight)
RICK
As for #1, I have no clue. I guess it depends on what you mean by
morals (ie. conventionally defined, as defined by Pirsig...etc).
As for #2, Pirsig explicitly says in LILA that it often takes a century
or two before we can tell the saints from the heretics. Given this advice,
I would think we can never know for sure which changes are good and which
are bad.
ERIN
>...That is if times are heading in a direction is it more
>moral to try to change the direction if you don't like it or
>try and be open to see the good in it.
RICK
Experience teaches us our values, and it teaches us when to reevaluate. The
best we can hope for is to remain open-minded and try and recognize a good
thing when we see it.
rick
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
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 : Fri Oct 25 2002 - 16:06:24 BST