Quoting Arlo Bensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > [Platt] > Apparently from the vantage point of the inorganic and biological > levels their patterns can do no wrong. Is that true for the higher > levels as well? > > [Arlo] > Can you think of any activity that is 'immoral" or "wrong" that is so > not because of a level conflict?
Yes. I gave the example Pirsig gave that you deny as you explained below. [Arlo] > Are you suggesting there can be an "immoral biological pattern of values"? No. But if there are no immoral patterns within a level as you suggest, then I presume one intellectual pattern is just as good as another. > [Platt] > Doesn't Pirsig suggest there's also a scale of morality within a level? > > [Arlo] > Pirsig brings "man" into the equation (man eating beef versus > lettuce), and I think confuses the issue. Consider this, is it > "immoral" for a bear to eat a fish when it could be eating berries? I > think in Pirsig's example, "man" makes the issue about an > intellectual awareness of the MOQ versus biological satiation of > hunger. Because man "knows" that fish are more evolved than berries, > it would be immoral for him to eat the fish when berries are > bountiful. As such, I think this pulls the issue back into a conflict > of levels issue, and not something that is an "immoral pattern within > any particular level". Is it possible to leave "man" out of the MOQ? Would you say that from a social level view that all social patterns are equally moral? ------------------------------------------------- This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ 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/
