From: David Morey (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Sat May 29 2004 - 14:02:51 BST
Hi Wim
Some good points, the point must be to
encourage/allow evolution, with the goal
being quality, with the means being humane
and caring.
regards
David M
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wim Nusselder" <wim.nusselder@antenna.nl>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 10:39 PM
Subject: Re: MD MOQ and The Moral Evolution of Society.
> Dear Mark M.,
>
> You suggested 27 May 2004 09:02:28 -0400:
> '1. Static Quality may obey its own laws except where such laws would
> conflict with DQ.
> 2. Static Quality must respond to DQ except where such responses would
> restrict DQ.
> 3. Static Quality must protect its own existence as long as such
protection
> does not conflict with the first or second law.'
>
> I don't agree that DQ is more moral than sq.
>
> Pirsig wrote in his introduction to Lila's Child:
> 'After reading through these and many other comments, I've concluded that
> the biggest improvement I could make in the MOQ would be to block the
notion
> that the MOQ claims to be a quick fix for every moral problem in the
> universe. I have never seen it that way. The image in my mind as I wrote
it
> was of a large football field that gave meaning to the game by telling you
> who was on the 20-yard line but did not decide which team would win. That
> was the point of the two opposing arguments over the death penalty
described
> in Lila. That was the point of the equilibrium between static and Dynamic
> Quality. Both are moral arguments. Both can claim the MOQ for support.'
>
> Next to your suggestion I would suggest as equally valid:
> 1. Dynamic Quality may create new patterns of value except where
> this -measured by standards of Static Quality- would imply degeneration
> (i.e. substituting better patterns of value with worse ones).
> 2. Dynamic Quality must respect existing standards of Static Quality.
> 3. Dynamic Quality must claim room for change of and relative freedom from
> static patterns of value, but only there where this change doesn't
endanger
> the highest quality static patterns of value existing.
>
> With friendly greetings,
>
> Wim
>
>
>
> 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
>
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 : Sat May 29 2004 - 21:59:33 BST