DM, Drat, I guess that flushes my dream of absolute morality down the tubes then.
Krimel ------------------------------- Krimel I think you have a point and Pirsig does not fully address it. Although I think consideration of the levels can help us to make moral decisions but it is a help not a full solution. DM ------------------------------ > DM, > > Not bad, but here is a troublesome thought. It is one thing for Pirsig to > say that it is better for a doctor to kill a germ that to let the germ > kill > a man. But is that a license to kill? Is it moral for humans to kill of > whole species? Especially when the choice to commit specicide is more a > matter of human convenience than survival. > > I have always been a bit troubled by the idea that it is better for an > idea > to kill a society than visa versa. What if it is a really bad idea? > > Krimel > > --------------------------- > > Hi Krim > > Well bad stuff happens, Pirsig does not comment on this > much. I'd say that the MOQ does allow for lower levels > destroying higher ones for their own low level values, > eg rock and bugs versus society and intellectuals. > Also I think the higher levels have greater freedom to > do what they want with the lower levels. Hence,humans > can destroy eco systems for their values and ignore > dependencies. > > Any use? > > DM > > ------------------------ > >> DM >> Even overcoming selfish genes you might say. >> >> All tendencies, few iron laws. Also DQ can clearly >> be very destructive, change is potentially dangerous. >> >> [Krimel] >> Perhaps if we stuck to really short sentences, we would never disagree at >> all. ;-> >> >> But just to potentially ruin a good thing, how do you personally >> reconcile >> this with the Pirsig's idea of DQ as "betterness"? >> 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/
