Hi Steve, > >>> Steve: > >>>> The idea is to break the taboo in the US of "questioning > >>>> someone's beliefs." All we are talking about is applying the same > >>>> conversational pressures to religious beliefs as we would to > >> someone's > >>>> beliefs about leprechauns, government bailouts, the best laundry > >>>> detergent, and whether or not the Holocaust actually happened. > >>> > >> Platt: > >>> Conversational pressures? LIke what? Ad hominem attacks? > >> > >> Steve: > >> No, like simply asking, "why do you believe that?" > > > Platt: > > OK. So I simply ask, "Why do you believe it's good to pressure someone > > to > > answer that question?" I can understand if the motive is to learn. > > But, in > > many cases the motive is to ridicule the response and trash the > > responder. > > > > Steve: > The motivation is to learn and to persuade. In the MOQ, bad ideas are > less moral than good ideas. It is moral to challenge bad ideas wherever > you find them.
In the MOQ I find little to distinguish bad ideas from good ideas other than maintaining individual freedom to pursue DQ and to keep an open mind. Again I'm thinking of the paintings in a gallery analogy. What do you find in the MOQ that helps you choose good ideas? > >> I seemed to have touched a nerve with saying we should ask such > simple > >> questions. I suppose it is scary for those buying into a social > >> pattern > >> which says such obvious questions are in bad taste. The problem is > >> that > >> not asking those questions has become dangerous to society as we saw > >> on > >> 9/11 when otherwise well-educated middle class men believed that they > >> could buy their way into heaven and be serviced by black-eyed virgins > >> if they became mass murderers. > >> > >> My hope is that intellectual patterns which include a taste for > >> evidence in support of all of our beliefs will trump the social > >> patterns which hold such intellectual patterns to be in bad taste > when > >> applied to religion. Religious beliefs should no longer be in a > >> special > >> class of socially protected unquestionable beliefs like believing > your > >> wife is beautiful and your children are unusually talented. We can no > >> longer afford to extend such nod-and-smile social courtesy when > >> religious beliefs have become a threat to civilization itself. > > > > Platt: > > OK. But, what about nonreligious beliefs that have become a threat to > > civilization -- like secular socialism with its "absence of a concept > > of > > indefinite Dynamic Quality?" (Lila, 17) > > Steve: > Certainly some beliefs are better than others and some are greater > threats than others Communism is no longer as of the essence as Islam. > I also don't want to lump all beliefs as equally dangerous. Islam is > much more of a threat to civilization than the Amish for example. Are the Amish any threat at all? The way some anti-religionists talk one might think so. As for secular socialism being a threat, I agree with Pirsig that it blocks the evolution of life because of its refusal to acknowledge DQ's existence. A civilization that remains static dies. > >> Steve: > >>>> BTW, for someone who opposes relativism, claiming that no belief is > >>>> better or worse than any other is a strange thing to say, but it > >>>> does > >>>> seem to be typical of conservatives to complain about moral > >> relativism > >>>> while promoting intellectual relativism. > >>> > >> Platt: > >>> I believe some beliefs are certainly better than others. My point > was > >>> that > >>> I am not so arrogant as to believe I couldn't possibly be wrong. Nor > >>> do I > >>> believe others should believe they are like gods and thus privileged > >> to > >>> force their beliefs on others. > >> > >> Steve: > >> Who believes that they can never be wrong? > > > > Al Gore, for one. Hamas for another. > > Steve: > Al Gore? Sure. He said the evidence for global warming is settled. > Steve: > > > >> And what do you mean when you keep saying that someone is trying to > >> force beliefs on another? > > > > Personal ad hominem attacks are such an attempt -- like calling those > > who > > question global warming "holocaust deniers." > > Steve: > How did we get onto global warming? I don't have the scientific > knowledge to take a side on that one. It does concern me that the > scientific community is concerned. Just as example of an attempt to force beliefs on others, unfortunately in this case at the point of a gun. (Legislation). > > Steve: > >> I'm just saying that we need to have conversations about religion > even > >> if it makes some people uncomfortable. That's it. I think that's all > >> any of us are saying. No one is suggesting that we need to tie people > >> up and have them renounce their gods at gun point. We just want > >> religious beliefs to enter the marketplace of ideas. > > > Platt: > > My impression is that religious beliefs are based less on intellectual > > persuasion than on responses to ineffable experiences, like paintings > > in a > > gallery. But, if someone wants to engage in a discussion about > > religion, > > fine with me so long as ad hominem attacks, overt or subtle, are > > avoided. > > Steve: > Pirsig says that intellectual patterns are exactly these sorts of > experiences and introduced the "paintings in a gallery" metaphor to > talk about them. Agree. Judging paintings as being good or bad is a highly idiosyncratic. Interestingly, one cannot say of a painting, like one can of a belief, that it is true or false. > >>> Platt: > >>> As for moral relativism -- that all behavior is equally moral -- I > >>> believe > >>> that's wrong. My moral beliefs follow the MOQ. > >>> > >>> Do you think morality applies to beliefs? > >>> > >> Steve: > >> Of course. Aren't intellectual patterns also patterns of value? > > > Platt: > > So your beliefs may be immoral? > > Steve: > I thought the MOQ says everything is all about morals. I thought the MOQ says reality is a moral but that ideas are secondary. But, I agree that the MOQ says its idea of reality is better than SOM's idea. I guess that makes the MOQ more moral, too. 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/
