[MD] Christian Ethics and U.S. Law

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting ARLO J BENSINGER JR <ajb102 at psu.edu>:

> [Platt]
> I propose to select the best from any ethical system, including the Indian
> ethical system you admire so much.
> 
> [Arlo]
> An interesting point of agreement? Although I am tempted to ask, what ethics are
> you ready to accept from the Indians?

Kindness to children.

> [Platt]
> I instinctively find that of low value. Like I said -- take the best and leave
> the rest.
> 
> [Arlo]
> Just what I said about the "founders". Perhaps we have some rooted agreement
> here after all.
> 
> [Platt] (You mean Arlo)
> But never mind, my point is only that I don't give a hoot what "the Founders"
> said or did.
> 
> [Arlo] (You mean Platt)
> I know you don't. That's obvious. You prefer Marx.
> 
> [Arlo]
> I don't care what "Marx" said, I reject a lot of what he offered, and I think he
> suffered from attempting to cure an S/O disease from within S/O. Anything I
> agree with, like "Freedom of Assembly", I agree with based on reason or spirit,
> not on the "authority" of who said it.

Tell me more about decisions based on "spirit."

> 
> [Arlo had said]
> "Laws" are social contracts we agree to live by so that we can draw  some
> betterness than we would without. It is a reasoned position. I  agree not to
> kill because I do not want to be killed. I agree to stay off your property in
> the hopes that I can procure my own little private island. I drive 55 (er,
> mostly) because I want others to drive safely. I do these things not because a
> "God" said so, but because reason alone tells me it is a better social
> arrangement.
> 
> [Platt]
> All metaphors. When does a metaphor meet the road?
> 
> [Arlo]
> In pragmatic, shared convention. Where did I say "metaphor" in that paragraph?

Haven't you said all language is metaphor? What then is the relation of 
language to pre-language (pre-intellectual)experience (perception). 
 
> [Platt]
> Maybe you are proposing abolishing private property and living like the Indians.
> But I'm not. To abolish private property is to make us all slaves to the state.
> 
> [Arlo]
> I'm for living more like the Indian, specifically regarding those aspects of
> his/her culture that have avoided S/O dualism... "being a part of the world",
> for example. As for the latter comment, abolishing private property would free
> us all, there would be no master, not state nor person. But to be honest, we
> are not ready for this, Platt, its far to spiritual a life for modern man.

Your introduction above and here of "spirit" leaves me wondering. What is
spirit, where did it come from, who created it, and how can I get some?
 
> [Arlo previously]
> Power and the ability to kill off others does not make one "hot".
> 
> [Platt]
> To be able to defend one's life is.
> 
> [Arlo]
> So you are saying our history with the Indian was exterminate or be
> exterminated? 

No. I'm saying the Indians couldn't defend themselves from outsiders. If the
Indians had realized this an adopted to European ways, like the Brujo suggested,
they probably would have enjoyed the fruits of European civilization, much
as immigrants who came later did who adopted to our culture and values. 

> [Platt]
> Pirsig says the main problem with the modern world is that the reason it uses,
> based on S/O logic, has a defect in it. It has no place for values. Thus, your
> appeals to reason are part of the problem.
> 
> [Arlo]
> Is reason inherently S/O? Do you side with Bo that "intellect" is "S/O"? If
> there can be no "intellect" that is not S/O, where does that leave room for the
> MOQ?

Generally I think Bo is right. The intellectual level is the value of S/O logic.
Above that level is the level of Art that takes the MOQ into its arms where truth
is decided like paintings in a gallery. Make sense?





> 
> [Platt]
> As I said, for a group that "got it right" they must have blown it, considering
> where they are today. 
> 
> [Arlo]
> Yes, "being part of the world" will always lose out to "enormous manifestations
> of power and wealth". Greed wins. Desire wins. And poor non-S/O cultures get
> sent to the burial grounds. Hooray for us.
> 
> [Arlo previously]
> So it seems the Zen Buddhists are the only ones worthy of our total admiration.
> 
> [Platt]
> Don't think so. Some of them in Viet Nam set fire to themselves. Not my cup of
> tea.
> 
> [Arlo]
> This was an act of resistance and to bring public awareness. But if we have to
> choose between an ethical system where a few have set themselves on fire to
> protest injustice, versus one with blood stains on its entire body, I'd take
> the former.
> 
> 
> 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/
> 




-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/