[MD] Is Quality Value?

[Platt Holden]

Hi Ham, Rebecca:

[PLatt]
> > Since Beauty and Perfection are not the same for
> > everybody, I don't see the problem. The question is
> > who decides what you as an individual are going to
> > be held accountable for?  You say it's "consensus,"
> > but I don't want morality imposed on my by some
> > mob. We've seen what horror that can bring.
> > Just consider lynching and slavery for starters.

[Ham] 
> Joan of Arc was burned at the stake.  Jesus was crucified.  O.J. Simpson
> was acquitted of murdering his wife.  What "absolute moral standard"
> prevented these mob decisions?

So you see the problem? There are no absolute moral standards. Like you, 
many people believe it's all relative. There's no problem for relativists 
when it's a society's convention (thanks Rebecca) to throw newborn baby 
girls into a bonfire. 

[Platt]
> > And pray tell, who decides the moral standards
> > that make up what you deem a "civilized society?"
> > Marx would argue that the morality of capitalism is
> > far from "civilized." We know the horrors his
> > followers inflicted on society.

[Ham] 
> Man's goodness and quest for perfection come from the realization of higher
> values than the primitive instincts that incite mob behavior.  Not everyone
> has the wisdom and sensibility to be inspired by these values.

You'te telling me!

>  Individual
> freedom is the ability to decide what's right and act on that decision,
> apart from what the "collective" attitudes, public polls, or authority in
> power dictate. Autocracies, whether based on religion or the power of the
> state, seek to rob man of this autonomy.  So, in a sense, do social
> conventions and moral codes.  But, as with individuals, a free society must
> accept certain responsibilities, including the maintenance of order and
> justice in the community.  This only works when the individuals who make up
> the society agree to live by its laws and conventions.  Do you believe that
> the moral code of a democratic society should be subject to some universal
> mandate rather than by the consensus of its people?  A papal decree,
> perhaps?

I don't think I ought to abide by a democratic society that votes to put a 
dictator in power, do you?     

> We all live in a relational world where the ultimate consequences of our
> decisions are an unknown.  That makes individual freedom the ability to
> choose one's actions in the context of an indeterminate reality.  So long
> as you and the majority of your fellow citizens value that freedom, and are
> willing to defend what is just and good in human behavior, I doubt that we
> have anything to worry about.

I'm all for freedom, but as Rebecca rightfully pointed out, "Freedom can 
cause beauty but it can also degrade into destruction and horror -- the 
difference between the degenerate and the savior." Freedom always runs the 
risk of becoming license. Further, "What is just and good in human 
behavior" is the question. If we can't agree on the answer, how can we 
defend it? Just look at what's going on the U.S. Congress these days with 
many eager to wave the white flag in the war on terrorism.

Best regards,
Platt