[Ron] > Making a statement > in MoQ that U.S. culture is more dynamic than Islamic cultures is a true > MoQ statement. Some cultures are more DYNAMIC than others. Platt: I don't think it's accurate to say some cultures (Giants) are more dynamic than others. Better to say some cultures allow individuals more freedom to respond to DQ. Perhaps that's your point. If so, we agree.
Ron: exactly my point and I'm glad we agree. [Ron] >.But when you > drag specific cultural values into the equation and judge cultures based > on those particular cultural values you fall into social fallacy. > Once you cease using intellectual standards of comparison Platt > you fall to Social level assumptions to base value judgments. > Arguments against multiculturalism are social level arguments. > It has no base in intellectual patterns and I doubt you can > make an intellectual appeal against it. Platt: Are you suggesting that multiculturalism has no base in intellect and thus cannot be challenged intellectually? No, that can't be because Pirsig makes an excellent intellectual argument agains the multicultural concept (intellectual pattern) that all cultures are morally equal. Ron: He makes the intellectual argument that cultures may be compared based on their intellectual freedom. Not based on their specific social values. The U.S. supports capitol punishment and legalized abortion which places it in the "murderous" category, The U.S. dollar is at it's lowest in the world economy at the moment, "impoverished" may apply . the U.S. gov. is based on Christian social principles so "backwards" may apply. Those social statements are relative and inconsequential to the intellectual assessments of how a culture values intellectual freedom which is a more descriptive and accurate way of assessing it's Quality. [Ron] > you are supplying lo quality intellectual patterns in arguments > against multi-culturalism although they are chocked full of > static social level reason to support it. Platt: What "social level reason" supports multiculturalism? What are "social level reasons" anyway? Ron: Definitions of "murder" "backwardness" and "poverty" and the social values that define those terms. Multiculturalism is the cornerstone of U.S. culture. Social level reason is the method of argumentation you employ when attacking the concept of the "Melting pot". When you do this you move from intellectual discourse to argument based on social level assumptions. Common terms for this mode of thinking are associated with bigotry and racism. [Ron] > It is more moral to say that U.S. culture is more dynamic than Islamic > culture than to say "backward, impoverished and murderous cultures are > inferior to American culture." > Which makes you sound like a collectivist social level cultural elitist > rather than an intellectual individual who makes value judgments from > experience. Platt: So you think backward, impoverished and murderous cultures are equal to the American culture? You sound like a collectivist social level multiculturalist academic. I agree with Pirsig that cultures like America who allow individuals freedom to respond to DQ are superior to cultures that are backward, impoverished and murderous. Ron: No, I think basing intellectual values on social level arguments is a low Quality intellectual pattern no self respecting MoQer would pursue. Platt: All that said, I'm glad we agree that some cultures are better than others. Ron: Yes, I am glad we agree that we may accurately assess which cultures value the intellectual more than others. 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/
