Welcome back Nick [Marsha quoted] --
The reincarnation of 'Adirondak Spirit' as 'Blue-jay Maple' has generated
more posts than I can track. Whatever it was that charged you up during the
past six months has returned you to us with a vengeance. Your motives are
right, and this Non-Aggressive Principle of yours would have some merit if
everyone lived by it. Alas, the world is populated by a host of
neo-Neanderthals who don't give a hoot for morality or human life, and would
just as soon murder you and your family if it served their purpose.
Besides, while the NAP issue may be relevant to morality, it has
side-tracked the philosophy discussion. For example, I'm surprised you let
Marsha get away with this statement:
[Marsha]:
"Liberty" and "justice" are intellectual patterns, conceptual
constructs, that last within the mind for a few nanosecond, yet
they can mistakenly be objectified as having an independent
existence.
You were so obsessed with the NAP doctrine that you responded "Ok. But this
doesn't mean I need to go out and initiate physical coercion upon other
people does it Marsha?"
Freedom, Liberty, and Justice are values. Do you believe values are
"intellectual patterns" that we can't sense or feel without intellect? Is
the joy you experience from a walk in the woods something you have to
conceptualize about? Are peace and beauty not directly sensed as an
immanent part of your awareness?
Last week I ran an essay by an anonymous author on my Values Page which
relates to subjective value.
Here's an excerpt that makes my point:
"Something cannot be valued without a consciousness. It makes no sense to
say that anything is valued objectively because if there is no subject,
there can be no preference for anything. The act of charity cannot be found
to be good without a mind any more than the smell of a flower can be found
to be pleasant without a nose. Unfortunately, most people are reared to
believe the opposite. They are taught that value is defined by some
impersonal standard that one is supposed to have or find. Such a standard
cannot exist. Value is a property that exists within minds. Something can
be valued by some people in the world, nobody in the world, or even everyone
in the world, but there cannot be a value that is "objective," "necessary,"
or "a priori." In other words, there cannot be anything that is desirable
to, and independent of, every possible point of view." -- [The Philosophy
of Individual Valuism, www.indval.org .]
Unfortunately, by insisting that Quality and Value are "intellectual
patterns", the Pirsigians render it impersonal, objective, and universal in
nature. In other words, they deny that value is realizable only by
a sensible agent without whom neither value nor quality would exist. Are
you comfortable with that concept, Nick?
Anyway, nice to see you back.
Essentially yours,
Ham
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/
