From: Matt poot (mattpoot@hotmail.com)
Date: Sat Mar 20 2004 - 07:22:19 GMT
Hi all,
Jim: Overgeneralisation is an intellectual
>problem.
Me: It is indeed :-o
Jim: But I would note that
it has been hypothesised that the current increases of basic
allergies suffered by children is due to a lack of building up basic
immunities to to over-use of basic hygeine practices. On the social
level this could be analogous to an over-refined set of social
structures (Victorian) where the presence of a mild profanity might
cause the moral equivalent of hyperallergic reaction
Me: As I work in the foodservice 'industry' (or so it is not called),
allergies are becoming quite ...present. I think that this is brought on
of course by the biological side of things (such as over-cleanliness, and
taking pills/medicine for every cold, and illness), which , are in turn,
brought on by this feeling of 'being dirty', when actually, we are cleaner
now, then humans have ever been, and to the point that it becomes unatural.
I use the case of showering every day .
Jim: Disease of some form is fairly inevitable in a diverse ecosystem
Me: I believe that the virus is one of the oldest life forms on earth. yet
it is a very odd life form , since it does not live, if it does not have a
host. After all, what is good (healthiness) would not be considered good,
if there was no bad (disease)
Again, I am cut short, due to tipsyiness and fatigue. Looking forward to
posting in the future. I am liking this discussion very much.
Poot :-D
>From: Jim Ledbury <jim.ledbury@dsl.pipex.com>
>Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>Subject: Re: MD SQ-SQ coherence and the Biosphere.
>Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 06:25:01 +0000
>
>Valuemetaphysics@aol.com wrote:
>
>>
>>I am unsure about the quality of diversity per se. This seems to me to
>>be a justification for a lot of BritArt which I find - um - pointless.
>>Okay, in this sphere (intellectual) I dislike the art but I will defend
>>their right to produce it. I think I am supportive of diversity, but
>>with qualifications.
>>
>>Mark 19-03-04: Hi Jim. I feel diversity can be defended in MoQ terms. The
>>position with BritArt may be a socially dominated issue? I find the
>>aesthetics of much BritArt to be lacking in intellectual Quality.
>>
>>Diversity in biological terms means plenty of things. We need this, but
>>diversity in disease? Well this one is being played out on many diverse
>>levels: intellectual, social and biological. I'm thinking of the
>>current todo with multiple disease jabs for kids here (MMR) which is a
>>media long runner in Britain, perhaps elsewhere.
>>
>>Mark 19-03-04: Diversity in disease may result from diversity in life
>>forms upon which disease can flourish? However, the latter is of a higher
>>evolutionary coherent state and in a better position to 'get the upper
>>hand'?
>>Disease is, by definition, an aberration of a better state? But the better
>>state got 'to be,' 'to exist' in the first place, and the MoQ helps
>>explain why.
>>
>I suspect there is probably an optimal diversity, which would be relate to
>concepts found in self-organised chaos. In ecological terms this would
>relate to the best filling of all available ecological niches. If there
>were fewer species, then there would be gaps to exploit and divergent
>evolution/external species would fill them; if there were too many, then
>their populations would dwindle and become unviable so we have some form of
>dynamic equilibrium. I remember reading an article in New Scientist a
>couple of years back about an ecologist (scientist not activist sense) in
>Costa Rica concluding that the health of biosphere was indicated by it's
>closeness to this optimum level, and that species were created and became
>extinct all the time. Unfortunately it's one of those theories likely to
>exploited by anti-ecological social forces who will gleefully seize on its
>concept that we shouldn't get too hung up about extinctions out of context.
>
>In other levels I would think that perhaps BritArt is precisely the point
>at which diversity is becoming watered down to the point of non-viability.
>Maybe that's a cause for celebration as it could be taken as an indicator
>of a thriving intellectual ecology :-/. Maybe I can get out of this
>unwelcome (to me) apparent support for the state of BritArt by
>hypothesising that the intellectual sphere of BritArt is a closed system,
>and that it may well be healthy in its own terms but poor in terms of
>relating to a wider social/intellectual sphere which I feel it is one of
>the basic responsibilities of intellectual quality. I don't know. Maybe
>that's dangerously close to a closed intellectual system which refuses to
>allow DQ to spread. Or maybe it's a higher yet value system?
>
>In expanding on the situations where diversity is not synonymous with
>quality in a kind of reduction ad absurdam argument (perhaps a naive one
>and I'm not suggesting that this is what you meant), a simplistic approach
>to diversity == quality would suggest that in biological science the more
>animal experimentation done the better. Again, this can only be the case
>in a very closed intellectual sphere with no regard to the wider social
>feedback resulting from such experimentation. To suggest that "don't be
>such a wuss, this is expanding intellectual quality (aka science)" erodes
>many healthy social protocols regarding mutual respect, I would think.
>
>Disease of some form is fairly inevitable in a diverse ecosystem. Taken on
>a simplistic level maybe we should celebrate disease as being indicative of
>diversity! On the social level, this would be akin to celebrating
>criminality I guess. On the intellectual level: I'm not sure: celebrating
>plagiarism and scientific fraud and disputation for it's own sake, I guess.
> However rather than try to stamp out the diversity, higher level
>protocols have to be worked out. With respect to disease - hygeine. With
>respect to criminality - laws. With respect to intellectual abuse -
>professional ethics, I suppose. In each case there is (or should be) a
>celebration of diversity - that is the extinction of diversity should only
>be accomplished where the conflict jeopardizes survival. Which kinda
>brings us to the state of current world affairs, I suppose; but I don't
>want to go there today. But I would note that it has been hypothesised
>that the current increases of basic allergies suffered by children is due
>to a lack of building up basic immunities to to over-use of basic hygeine
>practices. On the social level this could be analogous to an over-refined
>set of social structures (Victorian) where the presence of a mild profanity
>might cause the moral equivalent of hyperallergic reaction. On the
>intellectual level I guess this would be analogous to excessive witch hunts
>and denouncements of heterodox opinions as unscientific. This could also
>be expanded to attitudes related to pornography and hate literature.
>Celebrating pornography and hate literature per se would be celebrating the
>disease as evidence of diversity. To use the law against them however
>should be used with caution. I guess this would be the case when the
>pornography involved or encouraged rape or child abuse (non-consensual
>acts), or where the hate literature consituted incitement to violence.
>
>However, a lot of this is reasoning (at least I hope it's reasoning) by
>analogy and should be used with caution. Each case should be taken on it's
>own merits. Overgeneralisation is an intellectual problem.
>
>ATB
>Jim
>
>
>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
>
_________________________________________________________________
Free yourself from those irritating pop-up ads with MSn Premium. Get 2months
FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 Mar 20 2004 - 07:25:21 GMT