From: Ian Glendinning (ian@psybertron.org)
Date: Fri Dec 03 2004 - 22:27:46 GMT
Sorry Platt, I just do not get your game, and unfortunately it's getting in
the way of any serious constructive argument. I could go through your last
two responses, but I see little point. By way of just one example ...
You say "Looks like you assume those layers, the framework of the MOQ, will
absolutely always be physical, biological, social and intellectual even
though what we learn about them may change."
Despite the fact that in ther previous paragraph you quoted me (correctly)
as having said "it will evolve" !!! Doh !!!
I said "even" the hard physical level may evolve, in no way did I imply I
intended to say "but the layers would be otherwise fixed".
What planet are you on ?
You make an interesting twisted case Platt, but I'm not sure how it
progresses the MoQ.
Ian.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Platt Holden" < >
To: < >; < >
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 1:51 PM
Subject: Re: MD Is Morality Relative?
> Ian:
>
> > You said
> > "Is it not an absolute that the MOQ supports individual autonomy within
the
> > constraints of the MOQ framework" You're just playing the linguistic
game
> > of semantics with "axiomatic statements of the pragmatic" again. No, the
> > MoQ is not absolute, just the best emergent framework we humans
currently
> > have - it will evolve like the rest of us - yes, not just the biological
> > and higher, but even the hard physical layer, as we learn more and more
> > fundamental physics.
>
> Looks like your assume those layers, the framework of the MOQ, will
> absolutely always be physical, biological, social and intellectual even
> though what we "learn" about them may change. To think the physical world
> changes because of what we know about strikes me as hugely self-centric.
> (Not that there's anything wrong with that.)
>
> > You said
> > "Sanctioning what such luminaries as Stalin, Hitler and a host of
secular
> > tyrants decided was good for humanity." Utter garbage and you know it,
you
> > scaremonger. What is your game ?
>
> I didn't say what they did was good for humanity. They sold there
> particular brand of horror by claiming it was good of humanity. Don't you
> see, both secular and religious tyrants appeal to the "virtue" of serving
> the public good and humanity. That's how they obtain their power,
> promising a better life, here or in heaven. The tortures of the
> Inquisition were done to "save" the souls of the victims. Today, Bin Laden
> has convinced millions that humanity would be better by following him.
>
> > No way does a relative morality sanction such things.
>
> A relative morality believes that whatever is right is whatever works in
> society to assure inner harmony. Thus, one society should not judge the
> ethical practices of another.
>
> > I predict your next mail will be smartass remark about my statement
> > "The MoQ is not absolute" being axiomatic and absolute.
> .
> I think he's got it! Or at least, beginning to get it. :-) Many who shrink
> from absolutes like vampires from crosses rarely realize (or admit) how
> many absolutes govern their thinking, like "I'm certain it's all relative"
> and "The only thing certain is change."
>
> Platt
>
>
>
> 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
>
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 : Fri Dec 03 2004 - 22:37:54 GMT