DMB REPLIES TO CLARK'S QUESTIONS....
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pclark [SMTP:pclark@ipa.net]
> Sent: Saturday, November 06, 1999 9:25 PM
> To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> Subject: MD Blindness spillover.
>
>
>
> Clark writes:
> You have aroused my curiousity. Are you telling me that there is no
> way
> that an occupier of the three dynamic levels, plus the metadynamic
> level,
> can ever be even temporarily moved by circumstances to uphold the
> principles of the three static levels.
>
>
[David Buchanan] Well, jeez Clark, you're not making this easy
for me are you? I already addressed this issue at some length. Did you
skip that part? In fact I quoted both books on ideology, refered to the
same prinicple in Maslow's hierarchy and Pirsig's levels. All elements
in that post were used to stress the fact that evolutionary progress is
cumulative, that each step has to be "mastered" and preserved before
moving on. So the more advanced individuals don't temporarily uphold the
lower levels in extraordinary circumstances, they uphold them all the
time, twentyfour hours a day and seven days a week. But they have
additional values which are layered on top of the simple wish to stay
alive.
> Which level would you have been
> occupying had you been sitting off the coast of Japan during WW11
> waiting
> for the invasion to begin. Lets suppose that you would have had the
> suasive
> power to cause the fleet commander to do as you wanted.
>
[David Buchanan] Ideally, I'd have occupied all of the levels.
What would I do as fleet commander? You got me there. I'm no sailor.
>
> Or, suppose that you had been sitting in Washington and could have
> persuaded Truman to invade instead of dropping the bomb.
>
[David Buchanan] I don't think those were the only two options,
nuke civilians or invade the country. Why not simply nuke some of the
few ships Japan had left. It ended the war because of what it meant, not
so much the actual damage inflicted by the two bombs. It was a publicity
stunt of sorts, no? All we needed to do was show the Japanese, and the
Russians that we had it and could deliver it. But I'd really rather talk
about the MOQ.
>
> Would you have felt more righteous for
> being responsible for possibly another four million deaths on top of
> the
> already 55 million that the war had snuffed instead of dropping the
> bombs
> and just killing another one hundred thousand or so. Remember, the
> coyotes were gathering for the kill. Russia just declared war on Japan
> a couple of days before and were gobbling up all of the territory they
> could. David, is it dark up there? Looking forward to your answer.
> Ken
>
[David Buchanan] Clark, you sing this same song everytime the
topic comes up, and sometimes even when it doesn't come up. And its
common knowledge. Everybody know how deadly WWII was. You say this as if
its an exotic secret.
The historical fact is, even the Generals and advisors AT THE
TIME were NOT in agreement as to the necessity of using the bomb at all,
let alone the need to drop it on women and children.
[David Buchanan] And besides, the question is not the morality
of Truman's decision according to Dave or Clark or the USA. The question
is whether or not it was moral according to the MOQ.
And the main point of the post to which you replied is the
social levels blindness to the intellect. Can't you just smell the
irony?
The difference between social and intellectual values is like
the difference between prejudice and principle. You can see the
difference.
Thanks for your time. DMB
> 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
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 - 16:03:14 BST