Folks-
My last post for the day, although I doubt it will do much good in the way
of convincing Bob. I hope it will help others from being swayed by some of
his arguments.
On 6/6/99 at 1:21 PM -0500, Bob Wallace wrote:
> You are quite right I am as anti-democratic as can be. Democracy is a
> biological value--might makes right.
Not according to the MOQ. Democracy is a form of government and therefore a
social pattern used to control the biological patterns. You disagree with
how it does it and that's fine, but it is still properly placed in the
social level in the MOQ. Anything else is a misreading of Lila.
> The will of the majority. If two people decide to outvote a third and
> kill, cook and eat him, then logically there can be no disagreement--if
> one believes in democracy.
What if one believes in certain inalienable rights?
According to the MOQ, it is immoral to kill, cook, and eat the third person
if and only if he is not a threat to the society. Democracy is not involved
in that. If he were trying to kill one of the other members, then it would
be moral to kill him.
So, yes, they could vote to kill him in a democracy and that would be a
democracy with some facets of immorality. Democracy is not inherently
immoral, though. Just because the will of the majority rules, does not mean
that the majority is always morally correct. That is a goal, not an
inherent feature.
> My posts are not anti-intellectual. I am a graduate student in Political
> Science. I am all for intellectual freedom. I'm pointing out
> intellectuals cannot plan and run society.
You are making that opinion clear, with supporting quotes from economists
and conservatives, but with little to no fact or support from the MOQ. Is
there anything in the MOQ or Lila to support this assertion? If not, why
not? Where is the MOQ defective?
> Societies evolve over hundreds if not thousands of years.
When the first prisoners were deposited in Australia, did they operate
without a society for some time? Of course not. Societies do evolve over
time, granted, but that doesn't mean it takes time before a society exists.
A primitive society exists with just two people. A boring society, but a
society nonetheless.
> For 'intellectuals' to believe they can impose their values on top of
> societies--through the biological force of the State--has been
> uniformly a disaster.
The fundamental division of static quality in the MOQ is hierarchical:
intellectual
social
biological
inorganic
Each strata rules the one below. Social rules biological, intellectual
rules social. It is through intellectual patterns that people control the
social patterns which control the biological patterns.
So, not only should people operating in the intellectual realm believe that
they can do this, the MOQ argues that it is a moral imperative for them to
do so. If more intellectuals operate in the intellectual realm, then it
seems like they should control society...or at least that there should be
more intellectuals. What's wrong with thinking anyway?
This is why some people here say that your concept of reality is at odds
with the MOQ.
> I'm pointing out when government makes laws they should be extremely
> careful. They should have a Classical as well as Romantic understanding.
> They should carefully, logically imagine all the consequences of the
> law, both good and bad. They should look to history and other countries
> to what they effects of these laws are. They reason why is because
> government is pasting its values on top of people's values.
Which is why the government should be controlled by the people via a
democracy...
> Since many people enjoy the biological value of drug use, what
> government has done is create a huge black market that has damaged
> society.
There are other values to drug use, but rather than go there let me say
that I agree with your analysis of the drug problem in America and your
solution. I would love to point out that you are talking about using an
*intellectual* theory to alter society's handling of a social/biological
issue. This is very MOQish, especially for you...<G>.
Good night, folks.
Cheers.
Mark
________________________________________________________________________
Mark Brooks <mark@epiphanous.org> <http://www.epiphanous.org/>
How do you know who wrote this? <http://www.epiphanous.org/mark/pgp/>
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:04 BST