Roger:
Here’s my take on the moral dilemmas you posed.
1) How does the MOQ judge the morality of the Union in the
American Civil War?
The MOQ says that it was moral for the Union to eliminate the
Confederate social structure which prohibited a class of its
members from exercising their rights of free assembly, free
speech, trial by jury, etc. According to the MOQ, it is morally
wrong for a society to place restraints on the intellectual level’s
ability to respond to Dynamic Quality.
2) How does the MOQ judge the morality of Congress in the
impeachment of President Clinton?
The MOQ says that it was moral for Congress to impeach the
President on the grounds that he broke the law against perjury—an
indispensable law to preserve the American social structure that
supports the higher intellectual level.
3) How does the MOQ judge the morality of Truman’s decision to
drop nuclear bombs on Japan.
The MOQ says it was moral for Truman to drop the bombs for the
same reason as in No. 1. above. Substitute “Japanese social
structure” for “Confederate social structure.”
4) Your wife is eight months pregnant, but is starting to become
unstable due to some horrible events. She wants a partial birth
abortion. What is the moral course you should take?
The MOQ says it is immoral for society to kill a human being who
poses no threat to that society because only a human being can
respond to Dynamic Quality. The baby in this case is a viable
human being.
5) Who is more moral, the lion or the lamb?
The MOQ says both are equally moral on the biological level.
6) Going into the new millenium, what does the MOQ say we
should embrace as an economic model? Is it unbridled free
enterprise, or intellectually planned, socially-conscious socialism,
or somewhere in between? What is most moral?
The MOQ says free enterprise in more moral than socialism
because it allows more freedom for Dynamic Quality to change
static patterns and enhance evolutionary growth. But, free
enterprise must be restrained by society from interfering with the
social structures that support the intellectual level such as the laws
guaranteeing free speech, free travel, freedom of press, freedom of
religion, freedom of assembly, trial by jury, habeas corpus, etc.
Obviously my interpretation MOQ morality rests heavily on Pirsig’s
assertion that the greatest good is freedom from domination by any
static pattern without destroying the patterns themselves—freedom
from interference by others in a society supportive of intellect being
the highest good achieved so far.
Whether MOQ morality is “practical” or not can be endlessly
debated, and probably will be. Also, I’m aware that the MOQ can
be readily rationalized or “spun” to support nearly any preconceived
moral view, to which I plead as guilty as anyone else. I think the
inherent flaw of rationality (it cannot rationally prove its own
assumptions) is the fatal flaw of any moral order that claims to be
rational. Still, I’ll take them-(rationality and the MOQ)
PROVISIONALLY until something better comes along. (Thanks
Roger.)
Platt
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 - 16:03:16 BST