[MD] Down the road of mediocrity

[Arlo Bensinger]

[Arlo previously]
Pirsig is saying  the activity of fighting social repression of 
intellect is "more moral" than the activity of fighting social 
repression of biology.

[Platt]
I don't think that's what he's saying at all. I think he's saying a 
Galileo is more moral than a common criminal.

[Arlo]
Your intent to use criminality obscures this issue, Platt. Why say "a 
Galileo"? Let me ask you this (dropping this history and the 
criminality for now). Name someone who is "more moral" than you are. 
Do you think that makes their intrinsic value as a human being 
"better" than yours?

Do you feel, based on your wealth, that you are of higher value than 
an unemployed miner in West Virginia. You may argue you have a higher 
current social value, but does this alone determine your worth as a person?

Is Galileo more moral than Sam Walton? Is James Gleick a better 
person than Sam Walton?

[Platt]
The moral standing of individuals is further explained as Pirsig writes...

[Arlo]
There is nothing in that passage about the moral standing of 
individuals. It is a statement of morality in society preserving 
itself from destructive biological patterns. How you use this to prop 
up some "MOQ-Aristocracy" is beyond me.

[Platt]
I don't think the biological activity of eating is what Pirsig had in 
mind in the quote above.

[Arlo]
No he didn't. And that's the point. Moral social suppression of 
biological activity rests on proving that that activity threatens the 
existence of society. Its not a carte blanche call for a return to 
Victorian prudery.

[Platt]
He would preserve the life of the criminal if the criminal does not 
present a threat to society. Keep that in mind.

[Arlo]
Of course you know, anyone can claim anyone is a threat to society. 
Proving this threat beyond any reasonable doubt is what is key, 
simply claiming so does not give us provocation to execute 
willy-nilly. In other words, you have to prove to everyone why even 
the continued existence of an incarcerated person threatens the very 
fabric of society. And then, if so, and provided the threat is 
biological and NOT intellectual, then you can morally execute.

A poor, unemployed miner is not a threat to society, certainly not a 
"biological threat". And as such providing for his health and medical 
needs is a moral function of society.