I like the distinction between 'moral' and 'moralistic' in the story you've
related below, except I do not agree with qualification of 'in the interest of
others'. I think that phrase could be left out completely.
Using these definitions, 'moral' is absolutely compatible with zen or
'following the Tao'. These are actions done 'spontaneously', without thought,
without first classifying them into good or bad.
'Moralistic' on the other hand is necessarily post-thought. Before you act you
must distinguish and classify good or bad.
I like this distinction...Bill!
From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jue Miao
Jing Ming - ????
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2008 9:41 PM
Subject: [Zen] Moral & moralistic
I was watching CNN discussing whether America is moral or moralistic
with a professor from Boston College and another one from Yale.
What I was impressed with and remembered was....
"Being moral is to act spontaneously in the interest of others..."
"Being moralistic is to rationalize my I actions based on a certain set
"Therefore America is moralistic and not moral..."
__________ NOD32 3502 (20081007) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: