From: hampday@earthlink.net
Date: Sat Dec 04 2004 - 05:24:36 GMT
Hello, Ian --
You answered my two questions, as follows (my comments appended):
1. By what belief system or objective evidence do you believe that morality
evolves or progresses from lower to higher quality?
> To what belief system ?
> The MoQ and very nearly 50 years of personal empirical exprience.
> Morality evolves - no guarantee in what direction, without some basis to
> judge better or worse - like the MoQ oddly enough.
>
You haven't shown me any empirical examples to support the theory that
morality evolves.
For example, do you believe that morality has advanced to any extent over
the last 100 years? Since the age of enlightenment? How would you describe
these advances? You imply that MoQ provides some basis to "judge better or
worse". Can you be more specific, since if we can't measure moral progress
we can't assume that it has advanced.
2. How does "learning more and more fundamental physics" relate to this
evolution?
> How does learning lead to evolution ?
> That's almost a tautology, learning and evolution could be seen as
> practically synonymous in many contexts. What I'm saying is that any view
> that any of us has now (even RMP himself) of any one of the MoQ levels,
must
> be revised as we learn more about them, even the seemingly fixed physical
> layer. The expansion of physical knowledge did not end with Newton, or
> Heisenberg, or Stephen Hawking for that matter. Some people are backing
> superstrings, I'm backing quantum information and holochory, but it's too
> soon to call :-)
>
That's a nice outline of scientific progress and the accumulation of
empirical knowledge over the last century, but I don't see how it relates to
Morality. Are you saying that there is no difference between facts gathered
about the physical universe and the morality of man's culture? Or is this
MOQspeak, again -- rolling physical laws, biology and intellect into that
hypothetical ball called Quality? If that's the case, I'm afraid you've
lost me.
Thanks anyway,
Ham
> Ian
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <hampday@earthlink.net>
> To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2004 4:29 PM
> Subject: Re: MD Is Morality Relative?
>
>
> > Hello Ian --
> >
> > According to Platt, you said:
> > >
> > > 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.
> >
> > Two questions:
> > 1. By what belief system or objective evidence do you believe that
> morality
> > evolves or progresses from lower to higher quality?
> > 2. How does "learning more and more fundamental physics" relate to this
> > evolution?
> >
> > --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
>
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 : Sat Dec 04 2004 - 05:27:21 GMT