Re: MD levels (Down with Types of Value, Up with Types of Patterns)

From: Steve Peterson (speterson@fast.net)
Date: Sat Nov 09 2002 - 17:14:18 GMT

  • Next message: Steve Peterson: "Re: MD levels (Relativity)"

    > Hi Steve:
    >
    > A problem I see with your rejection of "types of patterns" is a
    > consequent rejection of the hierarchy of values, i.e., some things are
    > better than others. If, as you say, static patterns are relative to the
    > individual, what's to stop him from claiming anything he does is moral? If
    > everyone's values are equally good, logically everyone's values are
    > equally worthless.
    >
    > Something seems to missing from your interpretation, or, more likely,
    > I'm missing something.
    >
    > Platt

    Platt,

    I'm sure that there is more than one thing missing in the interpretation I
    described.

    The short answer to your question, which I tried to get away with in a
    previous post, was static patterns are relative, dynamic quality is
    absolute. I know this needs some unpacking and I'll need to give it a lot
    more thought. I would say that the hierarchy can function just as well (or
    just as poorly or perhaps even better) if applied from a given perspective
    but cannot be applied "objectively." It cannot be applied to say whether
    Hamlet is better or worse than the Mona Lisa in any absolute sense. With a
    nod to Darrell, it cannot be applied to judge others but it could still be
    used to decide what you should do.

    The questions I posed to you when I started this thread were not an example
    of Socratic irony. I am honestly struggling to understand the static
    levels, and I hit a wall with trying to categorize patterns. I don't claim
    that a "ways of valuing/types of awareness" interpretation is necessarily
    the correct interpretation. My feeling right now is that it is a better one
    at least for me.

    But before I get in too deep in trying to defend this interpretation, I
    would like to be sure that I am right about this problem with categorizing
    patterns of value. Can you answer my taxonomy questions? Here's another
    one for the hierarchy: which is better, sex or democracy? My view is that
    none of these questions mean anything.

    Steve

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 09 2002 - 17:07:35 GMT