Re: MD MOQ and The Moral Evolution of Society.

From: Mark Steven Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Thu May 27 2004 - 05:00:25 BST

  • Next message: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com: "Re: MD MOQ and The Moral Evolution of Society."

    On 26 May 2004 at 18:12, David Morey wrote:

    msh said:
    A great topic: MOQ and The Moral Evolution of Society.

    dm said:
    Yes, I would like to talk about this. Do we want to talk about
    how current society fails to attain the highest levels of freedom
    possible, or how we would see a more free society operating.

    msh says:
    I think these two will work together. We can and should identify
    freedom related problems within society; and we should, if we can,
    suggest ways in which such problems might be eliminated. This
    process will help us to sketch the outline of a morally more advanced
    society.

    Sometimes we may identify problems for which we have no immediate
    solution. This does not mean that there is none, and that we should
    just accept the problem as insolvable and shut up about it. IMO,
    it's vitally important to keep such problems on the back burner, and
    address them as new ideas about them bubble up.

    dm said:
    Also there is the problem of how to get from where we are to a more
    free society and culture.

    msh says:
    Yeah. This can be the gumption buster. Fortunately, we don't have
    to worry about it till we have a problem, or set of related problems,
    or our entire vision, more or less well-defined. Then all sorts of
    practical issues come into play. If we're looking to change a law,
    we need to seek the support of people who are experienced with the
    law-changing process. We'd need to anticipate, identify, and
    evaluate sources of resistance to our change of law; and this would
    involve research and analysis. We'd need public support for our
    change of law, and this would involve outreach and education.

    All of this makes up the HARD PART. It means dropping out of the
    ivory tower of abstract speculation and hitting the sometimes mean
    and dirty streets. But worrying about this part before we've even
    identified the problems would be a major gumption trap for sure. So
    let's not worry about it...yet.

    First, I think we need a first approximation of what a moral society
    might be like. I've taken a stab at this before, so let me paste the
    following for everyone's consideration, modification, approval or
    rejection:

    "Societal institutions that restrict or impede the free flow and
    interaction of ideas are immoral, especially if such ideas are
    critical of existing institutions. It is immoral for institutions to
    in any way restrict individual freedom to act and react in response
    to biological drives, or in response to other institutions, or in
    response to the free interchange of ideas, unless such activity
    threatens morally superior institutions or can be shown to eliminate
    or restrict such freedom for others."

    I know it's a mouthful, but it's a stab. If we can agree upon this
    or some other MOQ definition of "moral society," and we can agree to
    speak of morality (and its modifiers "good", "better", "less",
    "worse", "high", "low", etc) only in this sense, rather than in a
    religious or legal sense, then I think we can save a lot of time and
    confusion.

    Finally for tonight, cause I'm whipped, we should try to agree on
    some first principles. Here's one, pasted from an earlier message,
    for your consideration, modification, comments. Feel free to add
    your own.

    FP1) If a societal institution can be shown to immorally restrict or
    impede individual freedom, then that institution must be adequately
    modified, or dismantled.

    I'd like to end by throwing out a few examples of what might be
    considered immoral institutions (ii), for your qualification and
    comment, of course. Again, add your own.

             ii1) A law against smoking crack
             ii2) A law against assisted suicide
             ii3) A law against same sex marriages
             ii4) Laws granting human rights to corporations
             ii5) Corporations themselves
             ii6) Capital punishment
             ii7) Prisoner torture for information
             ii8) Use of public airwaves for private profit
             ii9) Selling life-saving medical services for private profit
            ii10) Selling life-sustaining services for private profit
                      (Water, air, subsistence food, clothing, shelter)
            

    Anyway, I don't know where this thread will lead us, but I'm looking
    forward to any and all constructive interactions.

    Best,
    Mark 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 : Thu May 27 2004 - 04:57:28 BST