Hey Andre, Comments below: On 8 Dec 2009 at 19:55, Andre Broersen wrote:
> Platt to Andre: > 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) > > Andre: > Not when used in moderation Platt, this is what I meant by 'harmonious > balance'. I doubt if Tiger Woods' wife is feeling much "harmonious balance" right now. > Platt: > 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. > > Andre: > Where they survived through their own means. These means were taken > away from most with the drive towards industrialisation. Most farmers > and labourers were dispossessed and forced to seek alternatives in > cities (much as is now taking place in e.g. China). > The conditions of the 'shelter' provided (if they were lucky enough) > by the land- and industry owning classes for the 'new' > labourers/factory workers is very well documented. They were an > absolute disgrace, even by the standards as they applied then. Don't you mean "IF they survived through their own means?" What's missing is a description of the conditions the laborers suffered before they were "dispossessed" (whatever that means).. > Platt: > Haven't they allowed free markets to flourish? That's the intelligent way > to improve living conditions. > > Andre: > Yep, and are very severe on excesses of abuse/ exploitation/ profit > making/working conditions/health standards etc. A different view of current working conditions in China is found here: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/july-dec07/china_11-20.html > Platt in answer to: > > 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. > > Andre: > This is an ad hominem argument Platt, and you know it. You do not > respond to the point I am making. One ad hominem attack deserves another. > Platt: > You have something against deserving, loyal, hard working, healthy? > > Andre: > Nope, but my experience of compassion is that it is not contingent > upon these social values. I'm sure you are aware that compassion can create dependency, as the U.S "war on poverty" amply demonstrates. . > Platt, in answer to my question about the role/function of the > intellectual level: > Certainly not to coerce others to your or my way of thinking or living. > > Andre: > Come on Platt, this is a perfectly ligitimate question. I asked you > what you see as what this level's role/ function is...not what it is > not. To define what it is not often helps define what it is. But to be specific: intellect's basic role is to insure human survival. > Platt: > 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. > > Andre: > No, I am exploring just as you. I just find it difficult to reconcile > the purpose of the MoQ, Quality, with your neo-con ideology. If > freedom (Quality), as Pirsig argues, is the 'movement' away from > static PoV's, I do not understand how you can desperately cling to one > (your neo-con one)...you being a arch MoQ'er...I thought. > Hence my question as to how do you reconcile the two? Likewise I find it difficult to reconcile your socialist ideology with the MOQ since nothing is more static than central government control of human behavior, no matter what the good intentions. . > Platt: > But, I'm not complaining. I enjoy our conversations as it allows us to > freely express our views. > > Andre: > So am I Platt. > > Kind regards > Andre Likewise, Andre. 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/
