From: Ian Glendinning (ian@psybertron.org)
Date: Tue Nov 30 2004 - 22:19:07 GMT
Ham,
"MOQ holds to the view that morality is relative" ?
Agreed.
"It is ... contrary to the MOQ to foster moral behavior" ?
Hardly.
It offers an evolving basis for judging relative morality / quality. We're
encouraged to use it. MoQ certainly does not foster immorality, it fosters a
way of deciding moral choices. (Clearly, though, MoQ doesn't foster any
absolute morality.)
"Man is autonomous in his ability to choose" ?
Subject only to physical possibility, an individual human is autonomous,
true. How good (moral) his choice is can be judged by the rest of us using
the MoQ. Freedom (DQ) is good, within the framework of MoQ, but not in an
absolutey unbounded anything-goes, anarchic way.
"I've even found support for moral relativity in the religious community."
Well that's OK then, must be true, glad we've had that confirmed by those in
the know :-)
Ian.
----- Original Message -----
From: <hampday@earthlink.net>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 6:04 PM
Subject: Re: MD Is Morality Relative?
>
> Hi Sam, Platt, Chin, et al
>
> Back on 11/9, Sam Norton responded to Platt's RMP quotation suggesting
that
> it is wrong to use religious absolutes as a standard for morality. If we
> are all in agreement about this, it means that MOQ holds to the view that
> morality is relative. Here is Sam's original post, including the Prisig
> quotation:
>
>
> > Hi Platt, Chin,
> >
> > Chin - thanks for an intriguing post, which quoted one of my favourite
> lines from ZMM: "My personal
> > feeling is that this is how any further improvement of the world will be
> done: by individuals making
> > Quality decisions and that's all."
> >
> > I think this is the answer to Platt's question: "What source of morality
> should [the nation] rely on
> > until the MOQ is as widely known and believed as religious moral
> teaching?" and it lies behind what
> > Platt quotes from RMP ""To put philosophy in the service of any social
> organization or any dogma is
> > immoral. It's a lower form of evolution trying to devour a higher one."
> >
> > In other words, the individual choosing Quality *cannot* be driven by
any
> coherent body of
> > teaching - including the MoQ - the decision has to be autonomous, else
> there is no DQ, therefore no
> > 'further improvement'.
> >
> > (Thing is, if the individual has this central a place in the application
> of the MoQ, shouldn't the
> > MoQ have some means of describing or fostering such behaviour? Or is it
> beyond it (by definition)?)
> >
> > Sam
>
> My own answer to Sam's parenthetical question is: Yes, it is not only
beyond
> but contrary to the MOQ to foster moral behavior. I say that because I
> believe that man is autonomous in his ability to choose, and I think
Pirsig
> agrees. Any standard imposed on that Freedom is necessarily conditional
> (i.e., relative), hence, opposed to the philosophy of individual autonomy.
> (I leave the matter as to whether this "fosters" or "generates" DQ to the
> MOQ arbitrators.). But most of those comprising what has been termed the
> "moral right" -- and that would include Platt and myself -- have at times
> expressed the view that society is doomed by the concept of moral
> relativism. After considerable introspection on this issue, I've come to
> the conclusion that imposing "absolutes" on moral behavior is contrary to
> the inherent autonomy of man, and that, except for the sanctity of
> individual sensibility (consciousness), the only philosophically
acceptable
> morality is relativistic.
>
> I've even found support for moral relativity in the religious community.
> You may find this thoughtful sermon by a Unitarian minister quite
revealing
> with respect to previous MOQ postings. I did. I've featured it on my
> "Values in the Balance" page this week. Check it out at
> www.essentialism.net/balance.htm . I'll be interested in your comments.
>
> Essentially yours,
> Ham
> >
>
>
>
> 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 - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
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 - 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 : Tue Nov 30 2004 - 22:23:12 GMT