From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Thu Oct 24 2002 - 17:09:24 BST
Hi Davor:
> To get back to my first words, I defined the intellectual level as the
> level where one accepts him or herself as a moral authority, Platt added;
> and takes full responsibiliy for that. But my doubts concern the issue of
> how 'detached' or 'semi detached' one is if he or she claims moral
> individual authority. It does not say a thing about the decisions he makes,
> in history there were a lot of people claiming moral authority but that did
> not end very well for them or for the society they lived in. The issue is
> that the social level and the intellectual level are very closely related,
> Pirsig says the intellectual level has taken it's own path, imo this is
> partly true because where the intellectual level takes it's own path imo
> the intellectual level was at it's worst as in science. It seems that
> common good and individual good are the same and where the intellectual
> level takes it's own path, defines it's own good becomes detached from the
> social level but also becomes meaningless. I see it all around me,
> individual authority. Acceptance becomes indifference and respect turns
> into hatred for toher moral authorities. People just no longer care, by
> letting go of the constraints of the social level, people absolutize their
> own authority and I despise it. The towing down of power from social
> institutions as church and state to the individual is going the wrong way.
> It seems that now people have escaped their caves, they stand in the bright
> light and are blinded by their freedom and running around like headless
> chickens, no idea where to go, no idea of what to do. Nowadays integration
> of foreigners is quite an issue here in the land of tolerance and tulips.
> Where it all goes wrong is that the foreigners are mostly social based, the
> dutchies are individually based, the process of socialization has been
> skipped and just below the surface the battle takes place, the bombs are
> ready, the enlightened moral auhorities are waiting for legitimation of
> ignition.
When you defined the intellectual level as the level where one accepts
him or herself as a moral authority you were comparing that stance to
blind acceptance and "obedience to dogmas as in (most) religions." So
I was quick to agree. In other words, it is better to think and determine
for yourself what is moral rather than blindly accept whatever is currently
fashionable or supported by authority. Since all decisions are
fundamentally moral in the MOQ, surely it is better to make them
yourself (and enjoy or suffer the consequences) than have your next
neighbor or (perish the thought) a government bureaucrat decide for you.
All social progress is made by individuals who decided a certain law or
practice was immoral, such as discriminatory laws against blacks, and
risked everything to change them. But in the MOQ, morality
encompasses more than just social matters. Deciding intellectually
what is true and not true is a moral decision. Here again, it is the
individual who ultimately must decide for him or herself, "That's a good
truth."
> davor, who no longer wants to be a moral authority!
Say it isn't so! Your decision to no longer be a moral authority is itself
based on a moral authority--namely, yourself. Now the question
becomes, who will you choose to be your moral authority? Won't your
choice be based on your own moral considerations?
> PS:(does anyone have an idea why everybody is unsubscribing, Squonk, John,
> Bodvar, feel a bit sad, is it me?)
Bo has retired for the time being because he believes his views weren't
doing "any good." I've written to him encouraging him to come back.
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 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 10:38:01 GMT