Hi Platt:
>>>> Platt said: >>>>>> Is it moral for politicians to promise benefits using other >>>>>> people's >>>>>> money? >>>>>> >>>>>> Seem to me that's a social pattern attempting to devour an >>>>>> intellectual >>>>>> pattern and thus immoral. >> >> Platt: >>> The intellectual pattern values our personal freedom from social >>> value coercion >>> as exemplified by Pirsig's citing intellect as the moral basis >>> for the values >> of >>> free speech, freedom of the press and trial by jury. (Lila, 13) >> >> Steve: >> What is the intellectual pattern that is being >> devoured by what social pattern? > Platt: > The freedom to enjoy the fruits of your own labor being devoured by > a law requiring > you to pay for benefits to others to whom you owe no duty. Steve: I'm still finding it hard to figure out what intellectual pattern of value you are talking about. In Lila Pirsig said, "It is immoral for truth to be subordinated to social values since that is a lower form of evolution devouring a higher one." I don't see that as an issue with politicians proposing social programs. If the fruits of labor represents money, we are talking about a social pattern of value, aren't we? Give to Caesar what is Caesar's then. I don't know if you are still pushing the fourth level as an individual level. Maybe you are saying it is the individual as an intellectual pattern being put in service of society through taxation, a social pattern of value. Is that it? It seems to me that this individual who is required by his government to pay taxes is as subject to social laws as she is to biological laws or to the law of gravity. I don't see anything immoral about it through comparison of types of patterns of value. The morality of it would be concerned with whether such taxation to pay for social programs really does improve society. If however, the government attempted to suppress his ideas it would be immoral in the "lower level attempting to devour a high level" sense that Pirsig discussed. There is also the premise in your argument that individuals in a society have no duty to other individuals that I disagree with. According to the MOQ, there is no individual without society. Regards, Steve 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/
