On 7 Dec 2009 at 16:43, Andre Broersen wrote: > Platt to Andre: > Yes, you're free to avoid McDonald's. That's the morality of a free > market. Unless you would rather have some high-school dropout from > the government tell you what you can and cannot eat. > > Andre: > Not sure what you are getting at here Platt. Both here and in some > other other places of the world, these high-school drop outs end up > working at McDonalds untill they are old enough to get the adult > wage..they then get the sack.
It's been my experience that government bureaucrats are generally low on the scale of mental acuity and thus the reference to high school dropouts. > > PLatt: > The moral levels are opposed to one another. So your scenario is > bogus. > > Andre: > The scenario I was trying to paint was one of harmonious balance > between the moral levels. It's my understanding the levels are basically in opposition to one another and attempt to dominate, a necessary condition for morals to be understood. " 'Vice' is an example. In an evolutionary morality the meaning of vice is quite clear. Vice is a conflict between biological quality and social quality. Things like sex and booze and drugs and- tobacco have a high biological quality, that is, they feel good, but are harmful for social reasons. They take all your money. They break up your family. They threaten the stability of the community." (Lila, 13) > Platt: > First, the free market doesn't deliberately kill. Governments do that, > sometimes necessarily to defeat biological criminals. > > Andre: > The world of industrial espionage is alive and kicking and its > internal workings do not appear very clean to me. Also, you may have > heard of French Telecom (privatised) where the working conditions over > the past 2 years have driven 17 workers to commit suicide. You may > also have heard of the working conditions and 'rewards' (I don't even > want to call them wages) at multi-nationals dealing in e.g. coffee, > bananas, chocolate etc,etc.( in general, those working in our so > called third-world countries...including China) > We can quibble about 'deliberate' until the cows come home.Why do you > think the Factory Acts of 1848 were introduced? In most cases the workers in factories were better off than the conditions they suffered in the environments from which they came where the threat of starvation was constant. > Platt: > Agree. That's exactly why socialism's central planners fail. > > Andre: > Well Platt, taking China as an example, I get the impression that > financially and economically this country is in a healthier state > than the US of A. I don't know what measures for comparison you have in mind. Perhaps you'll share them with us. > Pirsig may have argued that the socialists have inadvertently closed > the door on DQ but boy, oh boy, China is booming and learning very, > very fast........intelligently! Haven't they allowed free markets to flourish? That's the intelligent way to improve living conditions. > Platt: > Disagree. DQ is the most moral of all. "Its only perceived good is > freedom and its only perceived evil is static quality itself-any pattern of > one-sided fixed values that tries to contain and kill the ongoing free > force of life." > > Andre: > Now, unless I completely misunderstand your neo-con persuasion Platt > this is exactly my beef (thanks Lu) with you. You DO only allow a > pattern of one-sided fixed values...i.e the neo-con values and any > variant on these, you dismiss out of hand as commie, lefty, do-goody > trash. While you, on the other hand, are intelligent, broad-minded, compassionate and all around superior person whose socialist values are exactly what the world needs. . > Platt: > To me nothing is more compassionate that a system that provides > goods and services that history has shown benefits mankind in > countless ways and raises the standard of living for all. > > Andre: > Yes, to you, providing the 'all' meet some basic, socially acceptable > criteria such as deserving, loyal,hard working, healthy, etc, > etc.(sort of Rigel's criteria). You have something against deserving, loyal, hard working, healthy? > Platt: > Problems arise when a cabal of intellectuals with power to > enforce their ideas get together and think they know what's best for the > rest of us. > > Andre: > Apart from the obvious message here, I wonder what you see as the > role/function of the intellectual level. Certainly not to coerce others to your or my way of thinking or living. > Platt: > That we have different views and different interpretations of the MOQ > should not be surprising to anyone. The danger is in insisting there is > one right way to think and to demonize those who are thought by some > to stray from the party line > > Andre: > I was unaware of the MoQ as having a 'party line'. Yet you constantly insist that that the way I interpret the MOQ is not the right way, as if you have the inside scoop on the MOQ's real meaning. But, I'm not complaining. I enjoy our conversations as it allows us to freely express our views. 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/
