From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Sun Apr 11 2004 - 13:51:09 BST
In a message dated 4/11/04 2:37:07 AM GMT Daylight Time,
DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org writes:
> Sam said:
> How I understand the MoQ still has four levels (if not more) - inorganic,
> organic, social and
> eudaimonic.
Hi Sam,
There is no Eudaemonic level in the MoQ, as you know well.
The MoQ does not need it.
In MoQ terms, your development is an attempt to encapsulate the intellectual
level in Social dress, and is therefore a continuation of a historical
struggle between the social function of the church and intellectual freedom. In this
regard your tinkering is low Quality Intellectual value.
Christians, like all those who adhere to rigid static social patterns, must
form a coherent relationship with DQ. This may be done well, or poorly. You try
to do this well by introducing Eudaemonic notions which protect static social
convention while attempting to accommodate intellectual freedoms - but you
also negate absolute intellectual freedom to understand the Good.
For you, the Good is equated with God and not DQ/SQ coherence.
I don't bother myself with your static Quality very often because i have
better things to do. But i wished to make these comments for the benefit of anyone
else who finds Christian meddling with the MoQ offensive.
Mark
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 : Sun Apr 11 2004 - 13:52:59 BST