Re: MD Duty to Oneself Only? Or Others?

From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Tue Oct 11 2005 - 06:32:41 BST

  • Next message: platootje@netscape.net: "Re: MD Consciousness/MOQ, definition of"

    Dear Erin,

    You suspected 29 Sep 10:22 -0700 that I might have a better analogy than
    football for there being no line between where greed starts and something
    good or morally neutral ends.

    I don't have a better analogy at hand, but football (or any win-lose game)
    is a bad analogy anyway. 'Us' versus 'them' where 'us' (winning) represents
    'good' and 'them' (winning) represents bad (whatever the rules of the game
    that determine when one 'wins' or when one comes closer to winning) is an
    analogy from low quality 3rd level patterns of value. What we are seeking an
    analogy for is high quailty 3rd level patterns of value and my suggestion
    would be that their quality consists in a better or worse match with 4th
    level patterns of value or even DQ beyond. Whether to 'win' or to 'lose'
    (compared to others) is not a good 4th level or Dynamic standard for 3rd
    level patterns of value.

    Your discussion with Arlo was (in your words of 25 Sep 18:32 -0700):
    "saying you have to be low income to be Christ-like seems just a
    glamourization of poverty ... Although I agree with you on not being greedy
    I am just wondering where is drawing the line ..where it really starts to
    being about greed. ... I was trying to get a sense of where that line [is]
    of where it actually is about greed."

    'Being Christ-like' definitely doesn't (or shouldnt) refer to social status,
    glamour or any other type of 3rd level quality. The question should be
    whether being low income enables or implies one to be more truthful or
    Dynamic or whether people not trying to be rich enables or implies a society
    or a culture to be more truthful or Dynamic.

    You ended with:
    "Could you expand on the symbols that need to be integrated"
    in reaction to my
    "Only creating an integrated system of ideas [an idea being 'a set of
    symbols'] for ourselves (and trying to convince others...) can help us rank
    [duties, being ideas referring to sq or DQ]."

    We need an integrated system of ideas to integrate all possbile types of
    duties and rank them (at the 4th level). I referred for instance to duty
    towards one's species, a 4th level reference to 2nd level quality and duty
    towards a group (social well-being), a 4th level reference to 3rd level
    quality. A duty towards 'truth' would be a reference to 4th level quality.
    Wanting to be 'christ-like' would for me be more like a reference to DQ (and
    a choice rather than a duty, for as soon as it is seen as a duty it becomes
    4th level sq).

    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 - 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 Oct 11 2005 - 09:20:54 BST