On 27 Apr 2009, at 14:53, Paul Harwood wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snob
Perhaps I should have put a :-) on my last email, because I did in
fact find it interesting? If so, please accept them on this
one :-) :-) :-)
http://www.amazon.com/Diamond-Age-Illustrated-Primer-Spectra/dp/0553380966/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1240869657&sr=8-2
“Mr. Hackworth,” Finkle-McGraw said after the pleasantries had petered
out, speaking in a new tone of voice, a the-meeting-will-come-to-order
sort of voice, “please favour me with your opinion of hypocrisy."
“Excuse me. Hypocrisy, Your Grace?”
“Yes. You know.”
“It’s a vice, I suppose.”
“A little one or a big one? Think carefully-much hinges upon the
answer.”
“I suppose that depends upon the particular circumstances.”
“That will never fail to be a safe answer, Mr. Hackworth,” the Equity
Lord said reproachfully. Major Napier laughed, somewhat artificially,
not knowing what to make of this line of inquiry.
“Recent events in my life have renewed my appreciation for the virtues
of doing things safely,” Hackworth said. Both of the others chuckled
knowingly.
“You know, when I was a young man, hypocrisy was deemed the worst of
vices,” Finkle-McGraw said. “It was all because of moral relativism.
You see, in that sort of a climate, you are not allowed to criticise
others-after all, if there is no absolute right and wrong, then what
grounds is there for criticism?”
Finkle-McGraw paused, knowing that he had the full attention of his
audience, and began to withdraw a calabash pipe and various related
supplies and implements from his pockets. As he continued, he charged
the calabash with a blend of leather-brown tobacco so redolent that it
made Hackworth’s mouth water. He was tempted to spoon some of it into
his mouth.
“Now, this led to a good deal of general frustration, for people are
naturally censorious and love nothing better than to criticise others’
shortcomings. And so it was that they seized on hypocrisy and elevated
it from a ubiquitous peccadillo into the monarch of all vices. For,
you see, even if there is no right and wrong, you can find grounds to
criticise another person by contrasting what he has espoused with what
he has actually done. In this case, you are not making any judgment
whatsoever as to the correctness of his views or the morality of his
behaviour-you are merely pointing out that he has said one thing and
done another. Virtually all political discourse in the days of my youth
was devoted to the ferreting out of hypocrisy.
“You wouldn’t believe the things they said about the original
Victorians. Calling someone a Victorian in those days was almost like
calling them a fascist or a Nazi.”
Both Hackworth and Major Napier were dumbfounded. “Your Grace!” Napier
exdaimed. “I was naturally aware that their moral stance was radically
different from ours- but I am astonished to be informed that they
actually condemned the first Victorians.”
“Of course they did,” Finkle-McGraw said.
“Because the first Victorians were hypocrites,” Hackworth said,
getting it.
Finkle-McGraw beamed upon Hackworth like a master upon his favored
pupil. “As you can see, Major Napier, my estimate of Mr. Hackworth’s
mental acuity was not ill-founded.”
“While I would never have supposed otherwise, Your Grace,” Major
Napier said, “it is nonetheless gratifying to have seen a
demonstration.” Napier raised his glass in Hackworth’s direction.
“Because they were hypocrites,” Finkle-McGraw said, after igniting his
calabash and shooting a few tremendous fountains of smoke into the
air, “the Victorians were despised in the late twentieth century. Many
of the persons who held such opinions were, of course, guilty of the
most nefandous conduct themselves, and yet saw no paradox in holding
such views because they were not hypocrites themselves-they took no
moral stances and lived by none.”
“So they were morally superior to the Victorians-” Major Napier said,
still a bit snowed under.
“-even though-in fact, because-they had no morals at all.” There was a
moment of silent, bewildered head-shaking around the copper table.
“We take a somewhat different view of hypocrisy,” Finkle-McGraw
continued. “In the late-twentieth-century Weltanschauung, a hypocrite
was someone who espoused high moral views as part of a planned
campaign of deception-he never held these beliefs sincerely and
routinely violated them in privacy. Of course, most hypocrites are not
like that. Most of the time it’s a spirit-is-willing, flesh-is-weak
sort of thing.”
“That we occasionally violate our own stated moral code,” Major Napier
said, working it through, “does not imply that we are insincere in
espousing that code.”
“Of course not,” Finkle-McGraw said. “It’s perfectly obvious, really.
No one ever said that it was easy to hew to a strict code of conduct.
Really, the difficulties involved-the missteps we make along the way-are
what make it interesting. The internal, and eternal , struggle,
between our base impulses and the rigorous demands of our own moral
system is quintessentially human. It is how we conduct ourselves in
that struggle that determines how we may in time be judged by a higher
power.” All three men were quiet for a few moments, chewing mouthfuls
of beer or smoke, pondering the matter.
“I cannot help but infer,” Hackworth finally said, “that the present
lesson in comparative ethics-which I thought was nicely articulated
and for which I am grateful-must be thought to pertain, in some way,
to my
situation.”
Best
Steve
Best
Paul
On 27 Apr 2009, at 17:50, SteveC wrote:
On 27 Apr 2009, at 02:39, Paul Harwood wrote:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17017-gallery-flickr-user-traces-make-accidental-maps.html
http://icanhascheezburger.com/2007/11/28/interesting-2/
Best
Steve
_______________________________________________
Geowanking mailing list
[email protected]
http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
