Steve -- > Ham [previously]:: > Morality is the product of individuals reasoning together > to establish rules of conduct by which they can live in > harmony with each other. Civilization would never have > come about if man could not sense the value of peaceful > coexistence or possess the intelligence to implement a > social system that would ensure it.
> Steve: > I agree with the above so long as what you mean by morality is > social quality. As you know in the MOQ morality has a broader > usage than you would prefer. Call it what you will, so long as you acknowledge it as originating with man and not indigenous to the universe. Ham [previously]:: > America's founders said that all men are endowed with > the "unalienable" right to Life, Liberty (i.e., Freedom), and > the pursuit of Happiness. They recognized these values as > [precious] to man (as "endowed by their Creator") before > drafting the constitutional laws that would insure them. Steve: > I'm not sure if you are disagreeing here or what. I've corrected "innate to" above to "precious to" man, since the value of liberty (or freedom) is not the same as the identity thereof. If that doesn't resolve your confusion, I said to Arlo: "Freedom is the ability to choose one's values and act upon them without regard to necessity, coercion, or restraint by others. This capacity, like reason, is intrinsic to man--hence, the phrase "endowed by their Creator"--and it reflects the autonomous nature of human beingness." Steve: > To say that you are free to believe is to say that no one > can force you to believe what you don't believe. > If you had said that I could agree. > > But you said that man has the autonomy to *choose* his beliefs > and values. Beliefs and values aren't chosen. Try this: choose to > value something you don't value or choose to believe something > you don't already believe, and then I might believe that you have > this autonomy. I certainly don't. I wish I had a taste for olives. > I've really tried to like them but I can't. A rational belief (one that is not imposed by doctrine or authority) is based on the truth of logic or empirical knowledge. Such truth, although relative, holds high intellectual value (quality) for man and leads to the kind of conviction that we call a "belief". If I can be convinced that a personal belief is untrue, I may change my belief--a free decision on my part. But I can't rationally claim a belief based on a premise that has no value to me. As Alice said, "one can't believe impossible things." By the same token, I can't claim to like something that is distasteful to me. But tastes can change. I never liked rock music until I heard Alanis Morrisette's first album (don't ask me why--I just found something appealing about her style of music). By the way, I'm quite fond of olives, the Greek variety as well as the ripe one stuffed with pimientos, but I don't care for sweet potatoes or red cabbage. Ham (previously): > How do you define "intellectual value" other than as > something of value to you? Steve: > Intellectual value is like truth, a species of good-- > that which is good to believe. But, inasmuch as truth and goodness are relative, what you really mean is "that which is good FOR YOU to believe". 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/
