JONATHAN RAGES AT PLATT AND CALLS HIS
RATIONAL MORALITY A MoQery
I'm a dispassionate square - not too proud of it either. Platt's post
came
in 16 hours ago.
... almost 1000 minutes ...
No, I didn't reply immediately, didn't fly into a rage, I held back. I
thought about what Platt wrote and read back though some of his earlier
postings to the Squad.
PLATT:-
>Sorry if you find my
>questions and ideas "irritating." And if I've misinterpreted your
>views, I apologize.
---------<RAGE MODE ON>----------
"Irritating" doesn't cut it any more Platt. Irritation produces pearls.
But I'm more than irritated. I'm exasperated, furious .... at YOU
Platt. I'm furious at the whole Squad. Can't any of you see what Platt
is saying?
PLATT:
>Using words to reflect a point of view is an intellectual construct,
>as is rhetoric.
Yes Platt. WORDS. Spice things up with a few emotive words. Format it
with some highlighting and underlining for emphasis. Maybe add a
graphic, and while we are at it, a background jingle. Now, let's look at
that graphic again - wouldn't bare breasts and genitalia be more
emphatic?
And now the neon sign .... ....
What's it going to flash Platt?
I know ...
"QUALITY >>>> QUALITY >>>>QUALITY>>>..."
That's what MoQ is to you Platt.
>
>I agree each of us makes his own judgements. The
>question is, on what basis? Your answer seems to be "from biological
>instinct," like a mother's caring for her child. I don't think that's
>what Pirsig means by a rational morality, do you?
Platt, you just excluded "mother's caring" from rational morality. Out
goes caring with the bathwater and whatever else may be in it....
>
>OK. Now you seem to say that morality is whatever society says it is.
>Or to put it in rhetorically pejorative terms, morality by mob. ...
Damn right! Morality is whatever society or the mob says it is. You can
put it anyway you like, but the mob will do as it pleases and still call
it morality.
JONATHAN:-
>> Imagine the Good Samaritan
>> going off to meditate !!!
>> Platt, what does an "Ivory Tower" mean to you?
>
>Philosophy, academe, the Lila Squad and, oh yes, science.
Platt, are you dense or what? Do you think that people use the term
"Ivory Tower" as a compliment? You will turn it into a modern
Tower of Babel.
>Fine. But Pirsig claims the MoQ allows us to deal with morals "on the
>basis of reason." ....
Yes Platt. Take Pirsig's ideas, make a chart, program them into a
computer and start asking questions ....
and when your new god tells you to sacrifice your own child . . . what's
going to hold you back Platt?
Is anything going to hold you back?
JONATHAN
>> I now realise that it is stupid to talk about "morality" from
anything
>> other than the human perspective. We can't make moral judgements
about
>> anything other than our own behaviour, because that's the only thing
we
>> control. Intellect is nothing more than a tool for
>> analysing the likely outcome of alternative behaviours.
>
PLATT
>Well, so much for the value of the MoQ perspective. Sometime perhaps
>you'd care to explain just what the "human perspective" is.
Over to you Platt. Here are some clips from your past ...
<<<<
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 10:54:09 -0400
From: "Platt Holden" <pholden@worldnet.att.net>
To: Multiple recipients of <lilasqd@mail.hkg.com>
Subject: LS Re: Soc. and Int values (fwd)
[snip]
I don't mind being accused of "human centrism" (or "life chauvinistic"
for that matter). It's usually meant as a put down by science types who
assume the world exists independently of our observations in spite of
contrary evidence from their own quantum physicists. So bring on their
flack. We can handle it.
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1998 09:36:12 -0500
From: Platt Holden <pholden5@earthlink.net>
To: moq_discuss@moq.org
Subject: Re: MD Morality and the MOQ in Marx v Capitsalism
[snip]
Marx was the quintessential moralist, and oh the blood spilled and the
horrors perpetrated in his name.
>>>>
So Platt, your pretend ignorance of human values is dishonest. You
condemn Marxism for a bit of spilled blood? I've known of blood spilled
for far less worthy causes! What's wrong with spilling blood?
PLATT
>As for intellect being
>"nothing more than," I get the idea that you, like Fintan, put the
>social level morally above the intellectual, which seems strange to me
>coming from a scientist.
>
>It all sounds to me, Jonathan, that you are flat out renouncing the
>MoQ as a rational means for determining what is moral, thereby
>dismissing a large chunk of Pirsig's metaphysics.
What's happened to you Platt? Or is it me?
In previous months we had some pleasant exchanges.
I don't think that I am renouncing MoQ, but I renounce your view of it,
particularly your view of rationality.
That SOM of a bitch may have got you Platt, and made a MoQery.
----------<RAGE MODE OFF>-----------
Okay you artists out there. Stop laughing at my "rage mode". I'm just
waaaayyy too square.
Ex British prime minister James Callaghan once described Margaret
Thatcher's verbal attack to being "a bit like being ravaged by a dead
sheep". Believe me, I'd give almost anything to avoid being compared to
her.
Damn it! I should have replied to Platt straight away. I should have
ranted and raged like Fintan.
Have a nice day all (including Platt)
Jonathan B. Marder <MARDER@agri.huji.ac.il>
Department of Agricultural Botany, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Faculty of Agriculture, P.O.Box 12, Rehovot 76100, ISRAEL
Phone: +972 8 9481918 Fax: +972 8 9467763
Web page: http://www.agri.huji.ac.il/~marder
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:40 BST