Hello everyone
Richard Edgar wrote:
> Hi everyone
>
> I'm not sure if this is a private discussion and as such I should not be getting
>involved, but something Dan wrote concerns me.
Hi Richard
Thank you for your comments.
>
>
> Dan wrote:
>
> If we equate memes with patterns of value, then all four levels "have" memes, but
>the lower level memes are separated from intellect by the social level, thus we are
>unaware of them.
>
> Does the social level really mean we are unaware of the lower levels of value?? As
>law-abiding human beings (as i am sure you all are), why do we not commit crimes
>against our organic values? is it because society tells us not to and our intellect
>agrees (as Dan seems to be saying) or is it that the intellect allows us to perform
>our own evaluations of the situations giving rise to social law? I.E. our intellect
>allows us to make our own mind up about what is right and wrong and thus to challenge
>the outdated laws society has flung upon us.
I am not at all sure that we don't commit crimes against our "organic" values --
smoking cigarettes, drinking booze, over-eating, etc. are all "bad for you". The most
extreme case is suicide. Be that as it may, the role of individual vs. society is very
complex yet summed up simply in the MOQ as a Dynamic evolutionary advance from
biological level functions. Intellect, on the other hand, is a Dynamic evolutionary
advance from social functions. So it is biology (our senses) which allows us to
perform evaluations of situations giving rise to social law, which spells out very
concretely what is right and what is wrong in absolute terms. Finally, intellect
allows the individual to come along and say,
hey, this isn't right.
>
>
> I believe that society does not block the path between the intellect and the
>inorganic values, but rather that the intellect allows us to re-evaluate the role of
>society within the framework of organic values. Only by discrediting the society
>value system can we truly become a species with an intellectual value system.
>
> As an example, take a crime against the organic value system. Serious assault. In
>the organic value system assault is bad, the society value system then says assaults
>are committed by people who shouldn't be allowed to assault so they should be locked
>up or sent away from the rest of society. The intellect however, argues that since
>all organic systems should be treated equally, and thus the criminal should be
>rehabilitated, made to understand his or her crime and allowed to live with a normal
>life once he or she is able to do so without hurting others. So here, the intellect
>has applied itself to the organic value system to change societies wrong doers and
>allow them to live decent lives.
We have police and soldiers to deal with moral conflicts arising between the
biological/social levels, which is how assault is seen in the MOQ. As far as
individuals being treated equally, surely you aren't serious. And I don't know how it
is in other countries but here in the States once a felony conviction is on ones
record it stays there. But that is perhaps beside the point. Maybe in some Pollyannish
imaginary world rehabilitation works, but that is only because the prisoner has
finally come to understand that s/he had damned well better do exactly what they're
told or they will never get out (remember Phaedrus' very astute insight in the insane
asylum?)
>
>
> If this system has value, then doesn't the whole business of "is a copy of
>experience the same as experience?" needs a new factor introducing, that being "What
>is the role of a DERIVED experience on the value system?" Analogous to this in the
>above example, the people deciding the new laws based on justice for all are not the
>victims of the crime so how can they be involved in the situation outlined? If you
>are going to talk about experience, you should include derived experience as this is
>the leading factor of the intellectual value system.
Isn't derived experience redundant though? For certainly an experience must be derived
in order to qualify as experience. A dream not remembered is not an experience yet it
is still a dream. The cells in our bodies constantly replacing themselves are not
experienced yet they continue replacing themselves.
>
>
> Apologies if i have duplicated past arguments, i am new to the group.
No apologies needed. Thank you for your comments.
Dan
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
