Hi David B., Ken Clark, Platt and all,
DAVID B.
> 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.
>
This statement of David's really irked me. Many months ago, I flamed and
ranted against Platt for (what I understood) to be his take that the MoQ
provided some sort of moral compass. Now I find myself cheering PLATT all
the way when he attacks David and his "Harold Walsby" pseudophilosophy.
DAVID B.
>Well, jeez Clark, you're not making this easy
>for me are you? I already addressed this issue at some length.
David, I must be as stupid as Ken clark. I certainly saw your extremely LONG
contributions on the atom bomb topic and even read them. Maybe for my
benefit you will try and put it in SHORT. My own personal experience as a
teacher and writer is that being long winded is a sign I don't understand
what I'm talking about.
What I find most disturbing is your assertion that there is some sort of MoQ
morality that should sweep aside any other moral considerations. I believe
that our "moral compass" is the same moral sense that has been with us since
man first appeared on this planet. What has changed is that we've learned to
extrapolate a long way from action to consequences, and thus are able to
apply that morality much more intelligently. Truman didn't drop the atom
bomb because he thought it would be fun to kill a few thousand Japanese. He
predicted that it would bring Japan to a quick surrender. Fortunately that
judgement proved to be correct; the scenerio of a nuked Japan continuing to
fight is horrible (probably Truman's worst nightmare).
In contrast, another famous figure of the times with great moral integrity
was Ghandi. He was against fighting the Japanese and the Nazis altogether,
never mind nuking them. I assume that Ghandi and Truman had similar goals
i.e. a world at peace, but they had very different views about how to reach
that goal. In practise we should recognise that despite Ghandi's peaceful
nature, the campaign for Indian independence resulted in many more innocent
deaths than the two atom bombs together.
>Can't you just smell the irony?
That was a playful out-of-context quote from David B., who continued
> ... The difference between social and intellectual values is like
> the difference between prejudice and principle.
Prejudice isn't the right word here. Social values are "proven" values based
on experience.
The intellectual process allows judgement based on extrapolation of . . .
. . . experience (what else).
>You can see the difference.
Yes David. As an experimental scientists I am very well aware of the
difference between the actual experience (the data) and extrapolations, and
know their relative values.
Jonathan
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