David and squad,
You say:
[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.
Clark says:
No, I did not miss this part, in fact I agree with most of the ideas
expressed here and in your quotations from the previous post. I have a
different view of the development of the levels. I do not think that the
levels are discrete and mastered one after the other. I think that they are
acquired as a mix of "Truths" as one matures. I can't see a picture of all
sentient beings marching in order up through the levels. I think that each
individual is a mix of his/her own experiential history. That is the thrust
of Pirsig's "Many Truths" idea. I think that this idea is the lynchpin on
which the rest of the MoQ revolves and the idea that makes the MoQ a
workable philosophical system.
David says:
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.
Clark says:
Then why do you switch back to the blindness of the separate levels when
you try to make Truman a war criminal?
Clark says:
I get so tired of hearing people project Truman and his advisors at the
time as being moral neanderthals. My daughter, who is probably about your
age, says that this is the usual line of discussion on this topic in the
schools. They made the best decision possible at the time and it was in
accordance with the MoQ.
The Abomb was probably the most significant development of the century
and we were temporarily the only one to have it.
Your claim that it would have been better to drop it as a warning
offshore doesn't hold up. Again, we had only two bombs at the time. If we
had dropped it as a warning and it would have been successful it would have
still caused a significant delay.
The Russians declared war on Japan three days after the first bomb wqas
dropped. They deployed about 1.2 million men with the intention of
occupying Manchuria, North Korea, and the Kuril islands. It was important
that we bring the war to a close as quickly as possible.If the warning bomb
had not worked we would have been in a hell of a mess.
David says:
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.
Clark says:
This is true. I dislike the emotional appeal to women and children. They
would have been combatants in an invasion just like everybody else
David says:
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.
Clark says:
This is a bunch of c--p. It is wishful speculation which I believe, along
with many others, is not true. Again, we had only two bombs to play with. A
failure to convince would have been catastrophic
..
David says:
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?
Clark says:
Yes I can, but it is not coming from me. You were at pains to educate me,
using your two author examples, on how the levels are related to each
other:
>From David's post:
Lamm writes, "The individual who
identifies with the most recent of the principle ideologies thereby
identifies with man's most advanced needs, but in doing so DOES NOT
REJECT all the preceeding ideologies listed in the taxonomical order of
their appearance. He remains with them and they remain with him...The
ideologies of the hiest needs incorporate those of the basic needs."
Or as Walford put it "It is a functional necessity, the later phases
depend for their existence upon the continuing functional presence of
the earlier ones".
Clark writes:
Can't you see that these two interpretations of the levels do not agree
with your "blindness" of the social level to the intellectual level?
[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?
Clark says:
David, you use the two authors to illustrate the interconnectedness of
the four levels and then revert back to the blindness of the social level
to the intellectual level in an attempt to prove your point.
My point is that the decision to drop the bomb was guided by at least the
biological, social, and intellectual levels all working simultaneously.
I contend that the decision to drop the bomb was morally correct and in
accordance with Pirsig's MoQ. It was the least destructive of any of the
alternatives according to the best estimates of the day. You have latched
on the intellectual level standing alone and this was not the case.
I will be glad to drop this subject if you will quit calling Truman a
moral degenerate who should be prosecuted for war crimes. You ignore the
conditions prevailing at the time and according to my understanding you do
not fully understand Pirsig"s MoQ. Ken
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