Re: MD Re: Love and hate in the MOQ

From: Arlo Bensinger (ajb102@psu.edu)
Date: Tue Jul 20 2004 - 18:59:38 BST

  • Next message: David Morey: "Re: MD the metaphysics of free-enterprise"

    Hi David,

    At 06:38 17/07/2004, you wrote:
    >Hi Arlo
    >
    >Is not agape required for us to act
    >more intellectually and with more
    >consideration of values, good, quality,
    >hence love is that value that enable one
    >to recognise the quality in others, and the
    >world.

    Hmmm.... I'd say instead that Philia is that value that enables one to
    recognize the quality in others, and Agape is the that value that enables
    one to see quality in the world. (Eros, then, is the value that enables one
    to recognize quality in biology).

    Maybe, in more MOQ terms, "Philia" is a response to social quality. "Agape"
    is a response to Intellectual Quality, "Eros" is a response to biological
    quality.

    >Is hate something to do with
    >the failure of the other to recognise our/my
    >quality?

    I think if we separate out love into "eros, philia, agape" (for each of the
    MOQ levels, except "inorganic"), "hate" (as we are talking about it) seems
    to me to be, as you imply here, the antithesis of philia, and in our
    vocabulary has less (if anything) to do with eros or agape.

    I don't know if I'd characterize it as a "failure of the other to
    recognize", because this implies to me passivity. I'd say "hate" is the
    persistent belief in the low quality of the other despite the presence of
    contradictory or disputive evidence.

    >Even when the virus kills us when
    >can be conscious of its quality, but we may
    >value our own quality more and kill it first.

    But we don't "hate" it, do we? Or is this what you mean when you say....

    >Hate is linked to a narrow and local perspective
    >that does not see the interaction/conflict of different
    >levels of SQ as necessary and containing quality
    >at some level if not at all levels.

    By understanding the quality-as-perceived by the germ, we would no longer
    "hate" the germ, even as we admitted to valuing our Quality higher, right?

    >The tiger has quality
    >and beauty, but we kill it if it threatens the quality
    >of human life. But can we resolve these conflicts from
    >love rather than out of hate?

    Hmmm... I think, in this example, if we reached a true state of
    understanding the tiger's quality, we would work to find ways to allow to
    tiger to continue while protecting us from the tiger. Killing the tiger,
    would be an absolute last, but necessary step, if no other solution could
    be reached. Thus I would think that resolving the conflict out of love
    would look for other alternatives first prior to a last solution killing of
    the tiger.

    Arlo

    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 : Tue Jul 20 2004 - 18:57:09 BST