Hi Chris, (skip)
[Chris] > >> You see the social level as a necessary evil and something that we should > >> have as little of as possible. I am saying that it has been shown that > >> social level can be made to work under guiding intellectual principles > >> that does not prohibit Dynamic Development of the intellectual level, but > >> rather helps this development. [Platt] > > I agree that the social level can be directed by the intellectual level to > > encourage intellectual development. The first step towards that goal is to > > prevent the social level from imposing conformity on the intellectual > > level. That's why Pirsig cited free speech and other laws protecting the > > individual as intellect vs. social patterns. [Chris] > Indeed we may see free speech and such laws to be essential to the > development of the intellectual level etc, that I agree with. But things are > never black and white. For example free speech may be restricted so that > racist propaganda isn't allowed to hurt people. This is an example where the > social level is made to work on behalf of the intellectual level Restricting free speech some may find offensive inevitably leads to restricting all speech. As the great hero of the radical left, Noam Chomsky, said: "If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all." Political correctness is a double edged sword as the socialist-leaning Democratic party in the U.S. is finding out during the current nominating process with charges and counter charges of racism tearing the party apart. The politically correct chickens have come home to roost. > Another > example is good public schools, funded by taxes from all people living > within a certain area - if the general education level is heightened that is > certainly beneficial for the development of both that region and on a > greater plane, the intellectual level. I'm glad you said "good" public schools. Unfortunately, in the U.S. there are very few good government schools. There are many reason why this is so, not the least being a national teacher's union that prevents local school boards from firing bad teachers and making other desired changes in the curriculum. > The welfare state is not an example > of social patterns subduing intellectual, it is an example of how > intellectual pattern are creating what social patterns seem fitting. The > reasoning is simple: building a welfare-state we gain the advantage of > security in our everyday lives - we know that since we have constructed > society so, we will not end up with nothing in the gutter should we fail in > for example our economic endeavours. We know that everyone has the > possibility to go to school, on equal footing, and follow up on their > studies, even if someone comes from poor circumstances. Surely you see the > benefit to the intellectual level here if we build a broader base. Certainly > it must bee seen to that education and such is not subjugated to political > or religious agendas, but that immune-system is something that is built into > this system. > > Do you see my point? Yes. I see your point (except for an immune system of political or religious agendas being built into the system). But consider the other side of the coin: "The democratic welfare state is always temporary in nature. It simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous benefits from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democratic welfare state will finally collapse due to the loose fiscal policies, which is always followed by a dictatorship. "The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, the nations always progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependency; from dependency back to bondage." --- Attributed to Alexander Fraser Tyler, a Scottish professor, 1714 -- 1778. Or to put it more simply, "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin Ben Franklin also said: "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." Do you see my point? Regards, Platt 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/
