From: Scott R (jse885@spinn.net)
Date: Fri Oct 04 2002 - 21:30:05 BST
Platt,
Platt Holden wrote:
[Scott previous:] But more importantly, how does a belief in Quality as
an absolute ward off torture? Quality is undefinable. It is does not
come with a sticker on it saying "Thou shalt not torture". That sticker
is a fairly recent pattern of sq. Now I happen to have faith that there
*is* something beyond little ol' egoistical me that *does" say that
torture is always wrong, but I sure as hell don't know how to
demonstrate it, even if I presuppose that Quality is an absolute. How
does one, without recourse to an appeal to the beyond (and therefore not
something we have any vocabulary for) respond to the torturer?
[Platt:] First, for the one being tortured the situation, like in the
hot stove example, is directly, immediately, and preconceptually
perceived as low Quality. Unless one is a masochist (as Matt pointed
out), direct experiences of low quality are to be evaded if possible, a
"universal," natural moral behavior occurring at all levels. Second, a
society that condons torture is harming itself by blocking a potential
champion from preventing social deterioration, as illustrated in the
story of the brujo and the Zuni. To respond to a torturer, one need
only recall Galileo's story. (The answer is similar to Pirsig's
rationale against capital punishment.)
This is how the culture that has produced you, me, Pirsig, and Rorty
tells itself that torture is wrong. But this does not suffice to deter
the Spanish inquisitor, who acknowledges that a few innocents may be
tortured and killed, but that is a price to pay in order to eradicate a
heresy that will send many more to Hell if allowed to go unchecked (and
the innocent will be recompensed in Heaven).
We are not, now, persuaded by the inquisitor's argument.But to say that
torture or killing are absolutely wrong is usually denied in this
culture, when it is a question of preservation of the culture or of the
individual or family, etc. (The US doesn't officially condone torture,
but don't audiences tend to applaud the tough cops in movies beating out
vital information on an impending crime?) So if someone were to say
that torture (or any other generally accepted wrong) is absolutely
wrong, then he or she can only do so by appeal to the beyond (e.g., to
the Sermon on the Mount). If one does allow for exceptional
circumstances, then what those circumstances are is variable. Now it is
self-defense or "preserving the American way of life". To the Spanish
inquisitor it was "eliminating heresy".
- Scott
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 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 10:37:53 GMT