Ham Here's the link:
http://www.amazon.com/Eros-Good-Wisdom-According-Nature/dp/1591021480/ref=sr_1_1/103-8791936-2643846?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1191090011&sr=1-1 DM ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ham Priday" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 9:57 AM Subject: Re: [MD] Values > > Hi David -- > > >> DM: I provided a link in my last email did you see it? > > No, I saw no links but the standard MoQ references at the bottom of your > 9/24 message. > > However, I did check with Amazon, found that the author is James > Gouinlock, > and was able to read a couple of pages from the Introduction. His style > is > simple enough, but I don't see much substance to what he has to say. The > most profound assertion I read was that man learns from his responses to > the > values that affect his life, rather than from the information this > provides. > Perhaps there is more actual philosophy in the body of the book which > Amazon > did not make accessible. > >> Marcuse was a student of Heidegger and I think his One Dimensional Man >> is a decent book. > > Yes, I believe that was the one I read. But I became disenchanted with > existentialism after reading Sartre, and the concept that essence is > created > from being is a twisted notion that never made sense to me. > >> I would suggest that given modern understanding of >> hygiene and how infections are caught it is possible to >> use sex recreationally in the modern world and to have >> very little negatives. As a result of this of you an work it >> into how your relationships and family are structured. >> Much fear about this is derived from real dangers in the >> past that can be avoided by modern technology/protection >> and knowledge. > > Your endorsement of "recreational sex" is exactly what's wrong with our > society. You seem to think that promiscuity is fine so long as it is > "hygienic" and does not lead to impregnation or disease. You even suggest > that it's a practical way to test a relationship for marriage. Are you > aware of what rampant sexuality has done to our culture? First of all, > the > value of intimacy has been sacrificed to the irresponsible "have fun now" > value system of today's youth. Out of wedlock pregnancy is no longer > shamed > by society, so we produce more bastards each year that have to be raised > by > orphanages at the taxpayers' expense, not to mention the criminal > propensity > of fatherless children. And if you think premarital sex improves the > prospects for a good marriage, you need to check the statistics. > >> So I'd say that as moderns we have more opportunity for >> pleasure without the same costs that are ancestors faced so >> we can shrug off some of their fears and customs. > > You've just defined the "fun = value" credo of the new generation. Take > every opportunity for pleasure, and to hell with traditional values. I > sometimes wonder why people bother to marry at all, since it obviously > narrows their opportunity for fun. I can't tell you how many failed > marriages I've seen among people who had a "live-in" relationship before > deciding to make it "official." Don't you see that our younger generation > no longer understands the value of romantic courtship, let alone marriage > for life. The availability of birth control and abortion clinics is no > reason to abandon our cultural morality. Since we've reduced love between > two persons to a mechanical act performed for pleasure wherever possible, > like apes in the jungle, how can we expect our children to grow up as > responsible parents? > >> Surely one day we will be bored with our most basic >> activities and give more attention to our more developed ones. > > I think far too many are already bored with marriage and have no time to > develop the family structure > that is essential to civilization. We've trashed traditional values > because > having fun has taken precedence over living responsibly. We like to think > we've "liberated" ourselves from conventional morality. What we're really > done is taken civilization a big step backward. Where is the value in > that? > The "joy of the moment"? > >> I think eventually the media will bore of this pushing back the >> boundaries of taste. > > Again, you blame our lack of value judgment on the media, business > competition, and right wing politics. > It is the individual who brings value into the world, and it is > individuals > who advance or regress social morality by their value choices. > > [HP previously]: >> Blaming the competitive market on the right is a frivolous argument. > > [DM]: >> That is a very convenient answer and you should be ashamed. Companies >> must maximise their profits, fools must be parted from their money, >> and massive advertising spend seems to work very nicely. Surely you >> are wise enough to see the problem here. > > That fools will be parted from their money is the fools' problem, not a > problem of free enterprise. > You accuse me of a "convenient answer" to your copout. Foolish, > ignorant, > or irresponsible people do not deserve the rewards of a free society. > Would > you would change the capitalistic system to reflect the profligacy of its > people? Socialism is a system that brings standards down to the lowest > common denominator. Is that your solution to a materialistic society that > no longer values individual initiative, belief in a transcendent reality, > or > the pursuit of excellence that our ancestors dreamed of? How far we have > fallen! > >> I can assure you that business spends alot of time creating 'needs' >> we did not know we had. How do you think gadgets get sold? >> -you see the problems and try to cover over what is clearly one of >> the causes. Drop the ideology please! > > Most of my working life was spent in industrial advertising and marketing, > so I don't need a lecture on how new products are marketed. Industrial > purchasers are well aware of the caveat "buyer beware", and so are > intelligent consumers. The FDA, EPA, FHA, and a host of other government > agencies serve to protect those who aren't. Frankly, I believe we're > coddling the consumers already, with state bans on saturated fats and laws > against smoking. Soon we'll have government telling them what to eat, how > to dress, where to live, what to do for recreation, and whom to marry. > Are > we all retards? > > I'll gladly drop the ideology, if you will stop making excuses for > irresponsible behavior. > > Regards, > Ham > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
