From: johnny moral (johnnymoral@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Jul 30 2003 - 22:02:18 BST
>Johnny,
>
>There are only two points that I think need closing out on, the broad point
>of our disagreement and the force of saying "immerse ourselves in culture
>(or history, etc.)".
>
>Our disagreement is that you don't think its silly to say, "Wrong
>things can become right, but it doesn't mean they started out that way,"
>and I do when not doing historical analysis.
Well, I do think it is silly to say that, actually. Or "imporper." (Edwards
wrote that all the philosphising he was doing about God was "improper", just
like RMP did. )
>The thing is, you say "OK" to the part where I distinguish between
>historical analysis and narratives of progress,
I confess that I didn't get much out of that...
>but you continue to hammer on the, "If you are not following static
>patterns, you are immoral." I don't see the point in hammering on this. I
>think it is silly because today's immorality might be tommorrow's morality.
So? Decisions are always made according to the current perception of what
is best at the moment of deciding.
>Now, this isn't to say that I think it silly to say, "Murder is immoral."
>What I think silly is not saying that "X" is immoral, but saying
>categorically that if you are not following static patterns, you are
>immoral. Its a truism and not helpful at all in making decisions.
Some people deny that it is a truism, they think that it is better to break
static patterns and "follow DQ", which is an excuse to act immorally and
still feel self-righteous. And yes, it is helpful in making decisions to
try to follow static patterns, it is the only way to make a moral decision.
What is it you think most people would do that isn't moral?
>When you are making a decision, you weigh your options and you may know
>which option is traditionally thought of as immoral. However, your
>particular situation may present itself as a new particular context that
>needs a new set of rules, or should allow for an exception. If people
>follow in your thought that in that particular context there should be an
>exception, a new static pattern of morality is established.
If you think most people would agree with you and make that exception, then
it is, in your estimation, moral. THe only reason you would think that,
though, is if there were other static patterns at work that you felt most
people would consider stronger than the one you are considering breaking.
>For instance, in "murder is immoral," a possible exception might be in war.
> God seemed to be fine with that for the Jews when he kept sending them
>out to kill people. When you start divorcing morality from the context, I
>think you begin to lose force in saying things about it.
I don't divorce morality from the context. Again, you seem to think I am
incapable of seeing anything but one ugly static pattern at a time. Context
is lots of static patterns.
>Along those lines, when you say, "What I mean is we shouldn't always be
>trying to escape history, we should immerse ourselves in it," I think you
>are using misleading phrasing. We both agree on the inability to escape
>history. The difference is that "immerse ourselves in history" loses all
>force when it isn't counterbalanced by "escape from history." When you
>take the contingent turn, as we have, there is no counterbalance for
>immersion. When you say it, it implies that the opposite is an option,
>whereas for us, we should simply erode away the distinction between
>immersing and escaping and therefore erode away the force saying, "We
>should escape from history to someplace transcendental," which consequently
>erodes the force of saying the opposite. Its a tactical rhetoric point, as
>far as I can see we basically agree on contingency.
>
>Matt
Yeah, it seems we agree on continggency. I don't understand why you want
people to try to keep their heads out of the waters of culture, even though
you know that it is impossible. That's how you drown, by trying to climb
out of the water. There is no need for counterbalance, it is what erodes
away the force of all belief, and therefore of matter - it makes things not
matter.
Johnny
_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
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 : Wed Jul 30 2003 - 22:02:42 BST