> [Krimel] > What good is a system of morals based on levels when hierarchy of levels > provides no guidance as to which level has moral priority? I thought that > was your point over and over with the Doctor and the Germ. But if it is > immoral for the higher level society to kill the lower level trees then > what does the MoQ have to tell us about morality?
[Platt] The MOQ is clear. The higher levels have moral priority over the lower. "In general, given a choice of two courses to follow and all other things being equal, that choice which is more Dynamic, that is, at a higher level of evolution, is more moral." (Lila, 13) Cutting down a few trees here and there hardly dents the vitality of the biological level supporting humanity. The sun's cooling has much greater effect, in case you haven't noticed. [Krimel] The issue is not global warming but the specific examples of Easter Island and Haiti were social pressure caused deforestation and destroyed the societies. I thought you agreed that in these instances it was immoral for society to dominate biology. > [Krimel] > Are you willing to go further and say that what we experience > pre-intellectually is a function of our biology. It is the memory of our > ancestors encoded in our genes? [Platt] First question, yes. Atoms also experience, only non-biologically. Second question, depends on what you mean by "memory." Is the memory of the first human to build a fire encoded in our genes? No. Is the memory of being frightened by loud noises like motorcycles make? Yes. [Krimel] Right, not memory of specific events but of response to static patterns in our shared environments. By that I mean the patterns common to us and our ancestors. We inherit patterns of value that increase our probability of passing along our gene. 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/
