Re: MD the quality of equality

From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Mon Sep 06 2004 - 06:09:29 BST

  • Next message: Wim Nusselder: "Re: MD the quality of equality"

    Dear Platt,

    I wrote 2 Sep 2004 08:14:00 +0200:
    'A certain amount of equality is necessary to maintain social stability. The
    whole of humanity is part of one society (even if people also belong to
    different sub-societies), so on a global scale a certain amount of equality
    is also necessary.'

    You wrote 2 Sep 2004 10:22:54 -0400:
    'First, you've arbitrarily created a new definition of society--the whole
    world. Most people understand the word to mean as the dictionary defines
    it: "a community, nation, or broad grouping of people having common
    traditions, institutions, and collective activities and interests."
    Second, your proposition that a "certain amount of equality" is required
    to maintain stability leaves it totally up in the air about how much is a
    "certain amount."'

    I don't think I created a new definition of society. Humanity as a whole is
    a broad grouping of people sharing a lot of common traditions, institutions
    and collective activities and interests. In MoQish: there are a lot of 3rd
    level patterns of value in which all humans participate. We tend to identify
    with (the symbolic representations at the 4th level of) the -relatively few-
    3rd level patterns of value that distinguish us from sub-societies to which
    we don't belong and only a small part of our identity consists of our
    self-identification as 'human', though.
    Can we first agree that SOME equality is required to maintain stability of
    any society, before starting to discuss (and probably disagree) HOW MUCH is
    required for a specific society? That is THE issue between conservative and
    progressive/liberal politics and we usually don't choose the same position
    in that continuum.

    You continued:
    'To judge the validity of [E.g. a system of ideas that contains the idea
    that everyone is born with equal, unalienable rights cannot allow too much
    difference in rights between those who belong and don't belong to a specific
    society.] we should know how you define "rights." Should everyone in a given
    society have rights to benefits involuntarily paid for by others, or should
    everyone have the right to private property and full control over how his
    income is spent?'

    I don't think the right to social benefits, private property and an own
    income are unalienable rights one is born with. There are too many parts of
    the world in which they don't exist or are severely limited AND where people
    experience their alternative 3rd level patterns of value as 'normal' and
    morally right. But you live in a society where that system of ideas is
    widely shared, so you better answer whether these rights should be equal for
    every human and how much difference we should allow between
    Americans/Westerners and non-Americans/non-Westerners.

    'Resp.' means 'respectively'.

    You continued:
    'My interpretation of what you are saying is that a society that guarantees
    freedom of religion, of the press, trial by jury, etc., etc. as set forth in
    the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution is morally superior to,
    say, Iran or China.'

    That first society shows harmony with 4th level patterns of value (i.e.
    system of ideas valuing freedom of religion, of the press, trial by jury,
    etc., etc.). That's only one of my three criteria for judging how far
    societies are advanced in social evolution. For a complete judgement, you
    also need to assess their stability and versatility.

    You concluded:
    'It's all well and good to champion "equality" in a general sense. But the
    going gets rough when you get down to specifics and the question becomes the
    proper balance between the needs of society and the freedom of the
    individual from social coercion.'

    When we agree first on WHY it is well and good to champion some equality, we
    can then continue more easily to discuss the specifics.

    With friendly greetings,

    Wim

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries -

    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 : Mon Sep 06 2004 - 06:26:54 BST