Hi Mel, Some cultures are superior to others, as judged by Pirsig's criteria:
"Cultures can be graded and judged morally according to their contribution to the evolution of life. A culture that supports the dominance of social values over biological values is an absolutely superior culture to one that does not, and a culture that supports the dominance of intellectual values over social values is absolutely superior to one that does not. It is immoral to speak against a people because of the color of their skin, or any other genetic characteristic because these are not changeable and don't matter anyway. But it is not immoral to speak against a person because of his cultural characteristics if those cultural characteristics are immoral. These are changeable and they do matter." (Lila, 24) Am I correct is presuming you agree? Thanks. Platt > > Mel, > The arguement seems to be one of clarity. While Platt argues against > cultural relativism, Dmb and myself make an arguement for > multicultralism. > While we agree with Platt that cultural relativism inhibits a society, > we > disagree that the term multiculturalism is synonomous. > As Dave pointed out, often cultural relativism is used to paint > multiculturalism to support a closed door policy toward > ethnic tolerance.Unfortunately this fosters a justification for > cultural superiority. > While ethnic tolerance is moraly relativistic, multiculturalism ensures > that all members, regardless of ethnic backround, agree > to adhere to the same social laws (morals) governing them equally. > We see this as breaking cultural barriers in a intellectually dynamic > way, making it superior to societies who adhere to a more static > monocultural policy of ethnic intolerance. > Platt had ageed with me until I pointed out that this conflicted > with his stance on ethnic intolerance. > Platt is perfectly within his right to find the cultural practices of > others as moraly offensive he is not within his right to justify > ethnic cleansing under the guise of cultural supremacy as > what I took his Pirsig quote to mean to imply. > > "It´s a war of biological blacks and biological whites against social > blacks and social whites. Genetic patterns just confuse the matter. And > this is a war in which intellect, to end the paralysis of society has to > know whose side it is on, and support that side and never undercut it. > Where biological values are undermining social values intellectuals must > identify social behavior, not matter its ethnic connection, and support it > all the way without restraint. Intellectuals must find biological > behavior, > no matter what its ethnic connection, and limit or destroy destructive > biological patterns with complete moral ruthlessness., the way a doctor > destroys germs, before those biological patterns destroy civilization > itself. (Lila, 24) > > What Pirsig does say here is that social patterns must be upheld no > matter > the ethnic origin unless those patterns are biologically destructive. > > Multiculturalism is such a position. A position which upholds ethnic > social patterns while limiting or destroying destructive biological > patterns. > > -Ron > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > From: ml <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sunday, January 4, 2009 8:15:05 AM > Subject: Re: [MD] Multiculturalism scam > > Platt/ dmb/ Ron/ all: > > I find it interesting that I read these two posts and > find that they are not always antagonistic. In fact > they seem to raise a question as they work to define > a previously unseen shape, a question. > > What are the limits of multi-culturalism inside a > single society? > (at what point does it weaken a society, > at what point does it strengthen one? > --in MOQ terms) > > thanks--mel > > > -------------------- > > Platt said: > Multiculturism is based on the postmodern idea that all cultures are > morally equal, i.e, that they are neither "good nor bad," "right or > wrong." > > This idea is challenged by the MOQ. > > "A culture that supports the dominance of social values over biological > values is an absolutely superior culture to one that does not, and a > culture that supports the dominance of intellectual values over social > values is absolutely superior to one that does not " > > So a democratic republic that protects individual rights to free speech, > private property, trial by jury, etc. is superior to a Stalinist regime > that requires individuals to support the dictates of a communist state > under penalty of imprisonment or death. > > I make no apology for my bias towards a culture of democracy as opposed > to > a culture of totalitarianism. > -------------------- > > > > 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/ 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/
