From: hampday@earthlink.net
Date: Thu Jan 06 2005 - 05:38:08 GMT
Okay, Platt (and friend Ian may want to join us) --
You indicated earlier that you were "mulling over" my posting of 1/3. I
don't recall saying anything that complex or mystical, so was anxious to see
what questions you've come up with.
> Can you briefly summarize how your philosophy concludes that human life
> is holy? Is it because we humans are a species of Essence itself, and
Essence
> by definition is sacred?
I think you have the basic idea, and I suspect it's not new to you.
However, I would word it differently. For example, "sacred" is not a word I
use very often, and I never use "holy" -- especially around here.
"Precious" would be a more appropriate term because of its relevance to
Value, except that it sounds somewhat effeminate. Also, I don't like
"species of Essence" for a number of reasons, including its Darwinistic
implications.
In my thesis I said "the cultivation and nurturing of experientially derived
value is what human existence is all about, and it is what sustains us as a
civilized society. Fundamental to this process is belief in the sanctity of
the individual." Although I didn't elaborate, I really believe this is
true. Furthermore, I believe that man is the free "sensible agent" of
Essent's value and is individually linked to Essence through this value. If
man has an 'immortal soul', this is as close as we can come to defininig it.
In that sense, Value is the essence of man's reality. But the Essence Value
that we all experience is not the property of any single individual.
Rather, it is the finite or "conditional" aspect of Essence itself. As
mortals, we 'bathe in the Light', to borrow from biblical metaphor. As
such, our realization of Value is not only a precious and sacred thing, it
binds us all together in a reality beyond differentiated 'beingness'.
If you can appreciate this concept, you will understand how the
manipulation, impairment or destruction of any individual's sensibility
(including your own) is not only an offense to human nature but contrary to
our 'essential nature' as well. To me, this lays the foundation for moral
behavior. You may even want to adopt this as your "universal" (i.e.,
cosmic) morality system. Bear in mind, however, that the valuistic karma
I've described is absolute only in its connection to Essence; it is relative
in its application to individuals. Again, this is a function of the
teleology that's also implicit in my philosophy: as free agents of an
Absolute Source, we cannot be bound by absolute knowledge or absolute moral
authority.
> As I look around the world, I don't see much morality to enjoy, especially
> coming out of the Middle East in the form of Bin Laden's interpretation of
> the Koran.
Those miscreants of Bin Laden's persuasion are moral idiots who have blinded
themselves to any value but fear and power. They use the Koran and Allah's
name as a subterfuge for their wanton acts. Their success strategy is
control through fear, which destroys individual freedom and prevents their
subjects from acting morally. Like GWB, I'm betting that Freedom will
prevail.
> As I see it, the "principle of rightness" means advancing moral evolution,
> which means lifting as many of your thoughts as possible into the logical
> intellectual level as opposed to living your life guided by your
> irrational emotions or by what society demands of you. Some here consider
> mystic "enlightenment" to be the way forward, but have yet to spell out
> what that path will lead to much less what mysticism is other than the
> absence of thought.
>
> Does my answer make any sense to you?
Since your mention of the "principle of rightness", someone here (you
perhaps?) quoted it from an MOQ source as "[Quality is] the principle of
'rightness' which gives structure and purpose to the evolution of all life
and to the evolving understanding of the universe which life has created."
Thus, if your speaking on behalf of MOQ, it appears that the principle is
already built into the structiure. (At least that's what it sounds
like --I've never been very good at MOQ-speak.) In that case, one should be
moral "automatically" which, again, would remove one's freedom.
I would simply say, live for your values and morality will take care of
itself.
Essentially,
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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 06 2005 - 05:48:09 GMT