From: Alicia Dvorak (advorak@risd.edu)
Date: Mon May 17 2004 - 04:38:02 BST
On May 16, 2004, at 10:32 PM, InfoPro Consulting: Mark Heyman wrote
>
> On 16 May 2004 at 18:09, Alicia Dvorak wrote:
>
>
> ad said:
> There's been talk about the relationships between social and
> biological levels and the need for police/force to control
> 'biological crime'. but i don't think i understand what that means.
> laws lie entirely within the social level so in what ways does the
> breaking of those laws cross over into biology?
>
> msh said:
> In a nutshell, I think Pirsig would say that biological crimes
> consist in any activity that promotes the biological interest of the
> criminal to the detriment of society. So, if I smack my girlfriend's
> lover with a baseball bat, I've committed a crime. Even though my
> action serves, for me, a biological purpose, the eliminating of
> competition, such behavior is a threat to society overall, and is
> therefore criminal.
>
> Note that this has nothing to do with whether or not society has
> formally "criminalized" such behavior. This may be the source of
> your confusion in our discussions. We sometimes blur the two, but a
> distinction should be made between crime as derived from the MoQ and
> crime as defined by society's laws.
ALD: Ok, yeah, I'm realizing that there is confusion because of the
words used. When someone breaks a law they are committing a CRIME.
whether or not they are behaving morally is open to interpretation and
i'm sure depends on the situation. If someone commits what is called a
BIOLOGICAL crime, they may or may not be breaking any 'laws' but they
are acting immorally by putting putting a lower level over a higher
one...that's all pretty obvious probably, i just need to sort it out
clearly in order to understand.
> msh said:
> Within human societies of any size, societal decisions such as what
> and what not to criminalize are made by relatively small groups of
> privileged individuals with conflicting economic and power interests
> (in other words, biological self-interests).
ALD: these are biological interests? i would say that trying to gain
economic power is often social. yes one wants to live as comfortably
as possible and so far as that is a motive it is within biology, but
striving for power and wealth go beyond those desires. Recognition,
admiration, and celebrity (this is opening another whole topic!) are
part of Society and are gained by increased power or wealth. In MY
eyes money and power are not admirable, but in general they tend to
garner a certain amount of respect. By saying that money and power are
biological interests it seems as if you are implying that such things
as capitalism and politics are not part of the social level.
> msh said:
> In comparison to the
> total populations of their respective societies, these groups are
> microscopic in size, yet manage to accrue, almost always through
> inordinate wealth, or violence, or the threat of violence, a vastly
> disproportionate power over the decision- making processes of their
> societies.
ALD: i agree, but these rulers are a part of society, not separate from
it. Also although it may appear that one small group is
oppressing/controlling the larger population, i think that they are in
reality just very key players used by the "Giant" which nobody
individually, or even in a group, controls.
> msh said:
> As I've said elsewhere, societies define and prioritize
> criminality in all sorts of ways, most of them for the sole purpose
> of legitimizing the extant society. So a guy smacking you and
> grabbing your wallet does some mean time in prison or county jail,
> while a gal who steals millions, including the life savings of lotsa
> moms and pops, devastating thousands of families, pays a fine.
>
> ad said:
> is all crime biological?
>
> msh said:
> In the strictest sense of the MoQ, yes, all crime is biological, IMO.
> But, remember, this has nothing to do with whether or not the "crime"
> is recognized as such by any given society. Some activities which do
> not qualify as crime within the MoQ, may yet be criminalized by a
> society. Similarly, activities that should be criminal, are not
> always recognized as such, and are not formally criminalized.
ALD: once again, this makes sense...the confusion is just in the word
crime. Also I think this ties in with the differences between
degenerates and idealists.
> msh said:
> This is why it's so important for society's decisions to be influenced
> by
> the constant dynamic and free exchange and interaction of ideas, even
> if, in fact PARTICULARLY if, those ideas challenge the legitimacy of
> existing societal policy. This is the only way in which societies
> will make moral progress.
>
> ad said:
> what ARE the biological motives behind a crime.
>
> msh said:
> I think to state the bio motives behind any crime requires some real-
> world examples for analysis.
>
> ad said:
> Is wanting to steal money a biologically motivated action and wanting
> to make money a social one?
>
> msh says:
> Again, it depends on the details and circumstances. But, in fact,
> making money often involves stealing.
ALD: haha. i agree
Thanks and looking forward to responses.
Alicia
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 : Mon May 17 2004 - 04:55:48 BST