Ham: 'It may be the "morality" of the MoQ but, if so, it's incomplete. For if reality represented only "what we prefer", it would be a Utopia. Clearly this isn't the case. Floods, famines, disease, and physical abnormality, not to mention human cruelty and violence, must be accounted for as part of our reality. Existence is a self-perpetuating system, but it is not driven by morality. We inhabit an amoral universe. Distinguishing the good and the beautiful from the evil and the unseemly is man's yardstick.
Andre: Hi Ham and All. It seems to me that we are attributing meaning to some concepts which may not be very helpful.I think we need to get away from the notion that the idea of 'preference' automatically implies (religious??) notion of 'good' or 'goodness'. Each of the 'levels' of the MoQ offer freedom from the constraints of the lower parent level, but each is also dependent on that parent level for its existence. The MoQ identifies five such struggles/constraints: chaotic/ inorganic, inorganic-biological, biological-social, social-intellectual, and static/dynamic. This last, the static/dynamic code says that what is good in life isn't defined by inorganic, biology, society or intellect. What is good is freedom from domination by any static pattern, and that freedom doesn't have to be obtained by the destructuin of the patterns themselves. (LC) Thus 'preference' is perceived as 'good' because it implies 'freedom from constraint' and each level is characterised by the value of this evolutionary increment. To turn to some of your examples Ham: floods (or earthquakes) haven't you noticed the bonding and binding power of these events on people? (after lots of static patterns have fallen away).Noticed the scientific community ready with their accumulated data to improve understanding in an effort at prediction/ prevention? The dealing with the devastation and the dealing with the re-building? Famines.( I'd almost call them 'man-made' within the context of our current technological advances.) The devastating impact of these is (imho) exacerbated by the static patterns, the reluctance/ difficulty/ unwillingness (in some cases) to respond swiftly and generously by some social PoV's. And let's not forget the dominant SOM thinking in this. The dualistic us vs them, the assigning of blame/fault (usually to the victims), the deserve not deserve attitude, the colour/ politics, enemy/ally notions. These dualisms fall away when one is (in-) directly involved in such calamities. The static patterns do not exist or are suspended. Later it is 'business as usual...back to the static (trusted) patterns. The MoQ disintegrates these divisions into patterns of morality according to evolutionary 'progress'. The secret lies in DQ/SQ. And this is quite 'complete' (to use to positive of your expression above). Ham: '...one good thought can change your whole perspective on Reality. Isn't this what we're all really looking for? Andre: And I would suggest Ham that the MoQ is a hell of a good thought and some on this discuss have found it. 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/
