[DMB] DQ could be described as a rejection of static patterns?! No, Dave. That's just another way to express the narrow (and incorrect) view that morality is simply a matter of rejecting patterns.
[Arlo] Yeah, that's how I see it too. As I said a while back, if simply rejecting intellectual patterns is the moral goal, why are we even here? If someone really, genuinely believed that the most moral thing you can do is just 'reject' intellectual patterns, then why are they wasting your time in a philosophy forum? Why aren't they out there dancing in the moonlight while us poor statically-beholden fools wallow in our immorality? At the point of his being committed, Phaedrus had rejected all patterns. And if that is the moral high point of the story, then color me unimpressed. Instead, I'd say the moral high point was that Point B (his MOQ) was better than Point A (SOM). [DMB] It makes sense to reject those "one-sided fixed values" if and when they prevent growth and evolution. That was the case with the titular mechanic, whose whole operation was shut down by a torn slot in a screw. Totally stuck. That was the case with the titular crazy lady too. Lila is quite screwed too and totally stuck. These are the moments for static pattern killing. This is the kind of situation wherein some emptying out, some meditation, a big vacation makes sense. [Arlo] Right. The rejection of patterns fixes 'stuckness'. It counters stagnation, it brings balance. It moves evolution forward (yeah, I know that's redundant :-)). But the goal is just that, evolution, (re)creating patterns that are better. The mechanic becomes a better mechanic, one who is now capable of removing stuck screws. Phaedrus is a better philosopher, one with a solution to the problem he uncovered. [DMB] It is totally degenerate to reject static values simply because they are static. That's just running away from the problem. That's just working your way around the problem. It's just an evasion, a cop out. It's just vandalism, not growth or enlightenment. Criminals and Saints might look the same from a disenchanted SOM point of view but the MOQ has a long running theme on the contrarians. [Arlo] Right. You have three basic ways to go, as I see it. Stagnation, evolution, and devolution. Rejecting patterns may initially break stagnation, but you still have the evolution/devolution path. Contrarians don't just reject, they are creative, they move towards evolution. Criminals simply reject, they are destructive, they move towards devolution. At the point of rejection the criminal and the contrarian may appear similar, but the trajectories are morally distinct. The contrarian comes up with a better way to maintain the motorcycle. The criminal simply throws the motorcycle off a cliff. 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/md/archives.html
