Re: MD MOQ and The Moral Evolution of Society.

From: Ian Glendinning (ian@psybertron.org)
Date: Sun May 30 2004 - 14:27:27 BST

  • Next message: Mark Steven Heyman: "Re: MD MOQ and The Moral Evolution of Society."

    Good point in there ...
    This is evolution we are talking about ... clearly one mutation too far
    cannot be expected to "stick" and lead to a new stable generation - both
    halves of the evolution story are needed.
    The "feasible change" and the "supportive environment" - all change and no
    foundations is pure chaos - true "DQ leaves SQ in it's wake", but DQ needs
    SQ too.

    If the SQ supportive environment is "wrong" the DQ changes that survive as
    the next generation of SQ will also be "wrong".
    This is Blackmore's issue with memes. "Bad" ideas are equally (if not more)
    likely to succeed than "good" ones.
    SQ needs to know which qualities it values in order to sustain the platform
    for good DQ.

    Ian Glendinning

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "David Morey" <us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk>
    To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2004 12:15 PM
    Subject: Re: MD MOQ and The Moral Evolution of Society.

    > Hi Mark
    >
    > Hard to draw a line here between DQ/SQ
    > as DQ leaves SQ in its wake. There is perhaps
    > a balance between retaining the SQ that still
    > has its role/use and reaching higher -which
    > depends on SQ as its ladder.
    >
    > regards
    > David M
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: "Mark Steven Heyman" <markheyman@infoproconsulting.com>
    > To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    > Sent: Saturday, May 29, 2004 7:29 PM
    > Subject: Re: MD MOQ and The Moral Evolution of Society.
    >
    >
    > > On 29 May 2004 at 14:07, David Morey wrote:
    > > Not entirely fair, there is clearly the possibility
    > > of reaching too far too soon, whereby in an attempt
    > > to improve the intellectual level freedom we may introduce freedoms
    > > that destroy the social levels rise above the biological.
    > >
    > > msh says:
    > > Sure. But this is a failure of static value patterns, attempting to
    > > bite off more than they're ready to chew, so to speak, that SQ failed
    > > to "latch" onto DQ, for now. This doesn't mean that DQ gives way to
    > > SQ, does it? If so, the MOQ, as I understand it, collapses.
    > >
    > > Thanks,
    > > msh
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > 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
    >

    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 : Sun May 30 2004 - 14:31:47 BST