Hi all
IAN:
<some snipped>
Well no, actually words have meanings. Human life is sacred as, in the
Jeudo Christian tradition, it is made in the image of God.
In this tradition other animals are not made in the image of God and
are, therefore, not sacred.
In certain traditions other creatures are *sacred* yet I'm unaware of
a religion that makes all animals sacred. From experience it tends to
be atheists who tend towards this view and atheists do not have
anything sacred, by definition.
JON:
Yes, words are symbols that point to certain concepts. But be wary of being
too dependent on "official" dictionary definitions and "official" religious
categories. Language is limiting and failing to see beyond the definitions
can limit our perceptions of certain aspects of reality. It limits what we
are willing to believe.
So I can consider anything sacred. What I consider sacred may not be sacred
by the preexisting requirements of certain preexisting religions, but that
doesn't change the fact that it is sacred to ME. I won't allow my perceptions
of reality to be restricted and partitioned by the current "official"
definitions in dictionaries. Just like Pirsig would not let Quality be
restricted to a definition.
IAN:
That is instinct. If morality is instinct then it's a tortology. The
whole point of MORALITY is the concept of overlaying an ethos of Good
and Bad over the instinctive reaction. It's a necessary thing to
happen for social organisation yet in humanity it has passed the form
of mere instinct.
Witness any number of heroic deeds in war. Where men, or women, lay
down their lives to save the lives of people in whom they have no
selfish gene motivation...
JON:
Our intuitive sense of Quality is Morality. Animals have a primitive version
of this intuitive sense. They have a primitive version of Morality. As do
insects, cells, atoms, etc. Humans happen to have greater intelligence and
our intuitive sense of Morality is thus more focused and allows us to be
capable of selfless acts. We are capable of selfless acts because our
heightened perception of Quality tells us that these selfless acts are Moral.
Animals don't have this Moral obligation because their perception of Quality
doesn't allow them to see the value of selfless acts. But the primitive Moral
code that they do have is their intuitive sense of Quality, the same
intuitive sense humans have, only ours is more advanced.
And it should be noted that some animals DO carry out selfless acts. Examples
abound, actually. Dogs protecting their masters. I've seen a gang of lions
attacking a lone water buffalo, and other water buffalos, buffalos who were
far in the distance and in no danger from the lions, came charging to the
lone buffalo's aid. You could say these buffalos acted courageously.
Selflessly. They saw one of their own being killed, and wanted to help it
(and this was a full grown buffalo in danger; not a mother protecting its
calf situation). And there are many other such examples.
IAN:
The word sacred has a meaning. To people who believe in Gaia the earth
could be said to be sacred. Without an association to a religion or a
deity you cannot call anything sacred.
JON:
Again, you are limiting a word that points to a concept with preexisting
definitions and preexisting categories invented by humans. Sacred doesn't
have to have any association to religion. It can mean anything treated with
reverence.
IAN:
Things related to human need are coded into our moral ethos. This idea
that altruism is actually a valuable survival trait. Saving the planet
because if we don't save the planet we will die is not the same thing
as saving the planet because it is sacred. One is actually a selfish
act and the other is a selfless act.
JON:
It goes beyond just "saving the planet in order to save ourselves." The
problem is many people just can't SEE beyond. Thanks in part to logic taking
precedent over our deeper intuitive sense of Quality.
We should learn to treat the planet right, not only because it will help us
survive, but because it is Moral to treat the planet right. Moral for
Morality's sake, not just for humans, but for everything. It's all about
caring. What we care for. Our view of what we should care for is often sadly
limiting, just like what animals care for is sadly limiting.
The planet, and other aspects of reality, is sacred in ways we don't fully
understand. Perhaps our intuitive sense of Quality and Morality isn't focused
enough for us to understand. Yet. And maybe some people DO understand at some
deep level that they can't put into words, and since they can't put it into
words, nobody cares. It's all about caring. Just as our intuitive sense of
Morality isn't perfect, neither is the animals.
We are all part of the same reality, and reality is an ocean of Morality.
Jon
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
