Re: MD "biological" crime

From: InfoPro Consulting: Mark Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Mon May 17 2004 - 06:15:30 BST

  • Next message: Charles Vanderford: "Re: MD "biological" crime"

    On 16 May 2004 at 23:38, Alicia Dvorak wrote:

    > 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 said:
    Recognition, admiration, and celebrity (this is opening another whole
    topic!) are part of Society and are gained by increased power or
    wealth.

    msh says:
    Not really a different topic. What purpose is being served by
    gaining admiration, recognition, celebrity, other than for some
    organisms to feel better about themselves, thus strengthening their
    biological well being at the expense of others. Even if money and
    power don't follow, which in the real world they always do, in what
    way does society as a whole benefit from decisions made by such
    people?

    ald said:
    In MY eyes money and power are not admirable, but in general they
    tend to garner a certain amount of respect.

    msh says:
    Respect from whom? And why? And why is that important to the well
    being of the society as a whole? See above...

    ald said:
    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 says:
    Not sure I see the implication. Capitalism and politics are
    certainly social/cultural phenomena. When individuals participate in
    them, nurture them, for their own biological benefit to the detriment
    of society as a whole then, according to the MoQ, a crime has been
    committed.

    > 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 said:
    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 says:
    Well, ya gotta be careful in using Pirsig's "Giant" to justify the
    actions of society. I don't think he meant it to do so, and was just
    sort of waxing poetic in his interlude with Manhattan. The giant is
    big, but its not carved in stone or otherwise handed down from on
    high; it's created by society or interacting societies. To excuse
    the behavior of society by saying the giant made us do it is not
    satisfactory, at least not to me.

    Best,
    Mark Steven Heyman

    -- 
    InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors
    Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983
    Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com
    "Thought is only a flash between two long nights, but this flash is 
    everything."  -- Henri Poincare'
    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 - 06:12:47 BST