Hi Arlo, I get where you are coming from. I too accept the interconnectedness of things, not in the MoQ way (yet?), but some other way.
I suppose if man destroys himself, it is nature destroying nature. The never ending cycle of creation and destruction. Thanks for providing your opinion. Mark [Mark] Your yardstick for "better", seems all to be based around survival. This is the evolution view as presented by Darwin, and furthered by many. [Arlo] Well, in the cases of earthquakes and hurricanes, mediating and ameliorating experience tends to revolve around protecting biological and social patterns from inorganic ones, yes. If by "survival" you mean the preservation of higher level patterns from destruction by lower level ones, then, sure, that's just basic MOQ 101. [Mark] Now, would you say that man destroyed himself, or would you say that the earth destroyed man? [Arlo] Well, given your premises I'd say just that, that man effected the environment to chance and lead to this massive destruction. In a rubric of "betterness", such an understanding would lead man not to duplicate his mistakes in the future. One oblivious to man's role would simply leave him recommitting the same mistake in the future. So I think its pretty clear which "analogy" would serve man better. [Mark] Which discipline has morality as its foundation, Science or religion? [Arlo] Neither S/O science nor S/O religion has an evolutionary morality as its foundation, a point I make because the "morality" of religion that you refer to is social obedience. [Mark] Which discipline tells one to be kind to his neighbor rather than compete until the last man is standing. [Arlo] I know many atheists and humanists who are "kind to their neighbors", more kind in most cases than the "religious". [Mark] Which discipline state that there is a forgiving power, and which one states that there is no meaning and one life. [Arlo] I've already said there is strong psychological ego-satisfying by believing in a "forgiving power". If you "need" such a thing, you're going to "believe" it, for sure. As for "no meaning", that's again just rubbish. I know many atheists and humanists who find life to be filled with much meaning, its just that this "meaning" is added by the person, not the result of the will of some third party agent. [Mark] Which discipline believes that the intellect of man has no match, and which one puts man into perspective as a child? [Arlo] S/O science is rightly criticized, but so is S/O religion. If you think anything that puts man into perspective "as a child" is good, then I feel bad for you. Children need parents and guardians, and once the "church" has you buying that analogy they conveniently offer themselves as the parent (well, let's say guardian in the face of the absent parent-God). I'd say if its perspective you are seeking, a much better one would one that sees man not as a separate agent in a cosmos s/he will always be apart from, is one that sees us as interconnected, interwoven, and embedded agents with the experiential cosmos; the MOQ. [Mark] OK, which one do you choose, plate tectonics or gods? Which one do you think will last longer? [Arlo] This is precisely my point about adaptability. When better understanding comes along, geological analogies will shift. God analogies are static, unable to change or adapt. So I say that rather than a measure of Good, permanence often is an example of Bad. As I said, plate tectonics is a better analogy for the many reasons/rubrics I outlined. You say you disagree, but the only real counter rubric you offer is "which one makes you feel better?" I get the need for psychological massaging, but that does not make this analogy better. And in the light of the "angry god" analogy of Robertson, I get how such an analogy serves to consolidate and maintain his power-base. Again, hardly a rubric for proclaiming superiority over "geological analogies". 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/ 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/
