From: Steve Peterson (peterson.steve@verizon.net)
Date: Thu Dec 11 2003 - 23:46:55 GMT
Hi Platt,
> Steve wrote:
>> Intellectual domination of society is strengthened when ideas are
>> weighed on their intellectual quality rather than the amount of money
>> supporting their spread. So I see MOQ justification in limiting impact
>> of "voice" based on wealth because it may make room for "voice" based on
>> intellectual quality. So, what you've called intellect's attack on free
>> speech may be seen as a triumph of power based on intellectual quality
>> over power based on wealth.
Platt asked:
> Am I correct in assuming that you think there's an inverse ratio
> between money and intellectual quality, that is, a voice based on
> wealth is prima facie evidence that the intellectual quality of that
> voice is low? If so, what evidence would you cite?
Steve:
No, I don't assume that, nor do I assume that there is a direct relationship
between money and intellectual quality. I think there is likely to be only
a weak correlation, which is why I think selecting ideas to spread based on
financial backing is not the sort of marketplace of ideas that we should
foster.
> Also I wonder who you would suggest as judges to establish the
> "intellectual quality" of a political ad, or any speech for that
> matter?
I would suggest that individuals judge for themselves as I assume you would.
I don't understand why you asked.
I'm interested in what you thought of my take on replacing equating speech
and money with relating money and "voice" if you'd care to comment.
Regards,
Steve
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 Dec 11 2003 - 23:47:02 GMT