From: Charles Vanderford (proskuneo@fastermail.com)
Date: Wed May 19 2004 - 10:26:35 BST
MSH said:
Re: ...I suspect that he believes that homosexuality is immoral, and is
Re: attempting to justify his belief in terms of the MoQ, an ass
Re: backwards and pathetic form of philosophical inquiry. Whether or not
Re: I'm right will be easy enough to demonstrate, once he stops lurking
Re: and starts participating.
Well, I happened to check mail before bedtime, and I suppose it IS time to reply. To answer Mark, I don't actually have an opinion on whether homosexuality is immoral or not, which is why I asked the question originally months ago. If I already had an opinion it would be pointless to ask about it, and certainly any ulterior motive I may have would also be pointless considering many here are more philosophically inclined and experienced than I am.
It was only after asking that I realized the question about the biological level possibly contradicting itself was even more interesting. I'm not a philosopher at all. I'm not even that interested in philosophy as something to talk about much. I used to do that, but, as Mr. Pirsig himself once said, all the talk about Quality isn't Quality. I'm more interested in experiencing Pirsig's Quality directly.
Anyhow, Mark, I read your first reply and considered it. You said...
"I'm not sure the essential purpose of the biological level is to blindly create new life so much as to enhance and evolve extant life forms. Perhaps homosexuality is a mechanism of population control, a way of redirecting and dissipating sexual energy into a non-reproductive channel."
In just having thought about this a couple minutes, it seems to me that the biological level does indeed evolve and enhance life forms, but this happens through reproduction.
To my understanding, in terms of the MoQ the biological functions of a human being tell him when he needs food, when to sleep, have sex, relieve himself, and so on. And, as this human procreates and begets his future generations, perhaps the biological mechanisms in the bodies of his descendants changes them for the better in who knows what ways.
But, I'm not so sure I believe the statement that homosexuality may be a mechanism of population control. How are the biological mechanisms in a person aware of the world's population? The biological level is perhaps the most personal of all levels, not responding to the needs of society, but creating the needs of the individual, at least in my view.
As for the bio-level enhancing extant life forms, that depends a lot on what exactly you mean by 'enhance.' For my part right now, I just believe it maintains the life forms, keeps them alive, and that the enhancing belongs to the social and intellectual levels. As do such ideas as 'population control'.
I hope this better clarifies my position.
Looking forward to hearing more from you, and others,
Charles
-- _______________________________________________ Get your free email from http://fastermail.com Powered by Outblaze 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 : Wed May 19 2004 - 10:28:19 BST