Hi SA Well, seems to me that making sense of our values and any morality we construct to manage their interaction and conflicts is all about articulating our intuitions and what will work given the nature of the environment and the sort of people we have been and could be.
David M ----- Original Message ----- From: "Heather Perella" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2007 1:33 PM Subject: Re: [MD] Values > > [David M] >> Another really great book on values is Charles >> Taylor's Sources of the Self. > > Also, when I say below, value in this culture is > not readily understood or discussed, I'm also > including morals, but are morals the ranking aspect of > value decisions? We value, or in other words, we like > this or don't like this, and that is valuing. Do > morals step in when we rank? Such as the likes are > categorized here, and the dislikes are here, therefore > the valuing process is over, but at the same time the > moral process of grouping or categorizing has taken > place as well, is this how valuing and moral(ing) go > hand and hand? > I was discussing how morals seem to ground > valuing, but I'm not sure this is precise enough of a > statement. This kind of statement might be projecting > morals to mean a good and bad, right and wrong kind of > categorizing, grouping, or ranking, which is not > necessarily what I'm trying to say. Good morals seem > to be more in tune with values that 'are a part of > nature', in other words, values that try for 'being > one with nature', or also 'one with what is good'. > Thus, being moral is being what we/I value. If we/I > value something, but can't seem to fit it into our/my, > Way/Life/Existence, then the liked is not settled with > me/us. Thus, what is valued is moral if > completed/categorized/grouped/ranked as 'who I am' or > 'what reality is'. I'm not yet very clearly > expressing what I'm intuiting, but this seems close. > > thoughts? > > SA > > >> > [Ham] >> >> When was the last time you heard someone outside >> of >> > government >> >> or the MoQ talk about value? We're fooling >> > ourselves if we think that > people know what >> value >> > is, reflect on it, or even view it as important. >> > >> > Most people are concerned about issues, not >> values, >> > and where do >> >> they get their advice? From rock singers and >> movie >> > stars. >> > >> > >> > Ham, I agree. I don't even hear the word - >> value >> > - outside of the moq or politics and in the latter >> it >> > is usually referred to as 'family values'. I >> can't >> > think of any other context in politics it is used. >> > Does anybody else hear the word - value? >> > Also, it took me over a year on this discuss >> > forum to understand a basic notion of what value >> is. >> > I'm not saying due to this forum. For I read the >> word >> > here numerous times. It just didn't click as to >> what >> > value really meant. Especially in a moq context >> with >> > dq, this undefinable source, and sq, with the >> levels >> > and such. And then how quality is the same as >> value >> > and moral. I'm still not completely sure on the >> > quality - moral connection. I've got value >> > pinned-down to it can be thought of as a gateway >> of >> > like(s) and dislike(s). I find our decision to >> value >> > something based on our already existing static >> > patterns, and how much we are open to change or >> > 'something' new. Value is grounded in the static >> > patterns of intellect, society, organic, and >> > inorganic. Yet, to like and dislike something, >> taken >> > on face 'value', can easily be thought of as whims >> and >> > superficiality notions. I like this today, but >> > tomorrow now I like that, for example. Desires, >> > consumerism, sex, and instant gratifications that >> can >> > occur in this culture dip into this notion of >> likes >> > and dislikes where it sounds more like pleasure >> than >> > value. Yet, here is where the notion of value is >> even >> > more grounded and seen similar, or as the moq puts >> it, >> > the same as morals. Likes and dislikes in this >> > culture seem more conducive to pleasure in this >> > culture, but I'm sure, Ham, that's not what your >> > talking about, and that's not what the moq is >> talking >> > about either. These likes and dislikes are more >> moral >> > than that. >> > Do you see what I mean? How do we or how do >> we >> > get the message of value across without getting it >> > wrapped up in what this culture usually perceives >> > likes and dislikes to be? I like my chocolate >> today, >> > but tomorrow I'll like potato chips. Value usage, >> > value in action has become a value without morals. >> > >> > >> > thoughts? >> > >> > woods, >> > SA > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, > news, photos & more. > http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC > 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/
