[MD] Social Darwinism

[MarshaV]

At 12:57 PM 5/20/2007, you wrote:
>[SA]
>      Would not betterness, as a central tenet, involve
>a human being to want to be a part of this central
>tenet, or have a human being believe that he/she is
>thus logically this central tenet (for a central tenet
>must work everywhere, right?), therefore a person may
>begin to think they are this betterness.  So, does
>this mean others are NOT better, especially if they
>don't realize this betterness on an intellectual
>level?  Wouldn't this leave room for arrogance, maybe?
>
>[Krimel]
>Betterness is a term best applied to the individual. I strive for
>betterness. You strive for betterness. Even dmb strives ineffectively for
>betterness. But evolution does not strive. It just happens. If there is
>betterness involved it is you and I and dmb and who see it. It does not
>exist in the world. It exists in our heads. Our individual determinations of
>betterness may accurately reflect the future or not. They are nothing more
>than our individual estimates of probabilities in the future. And in the
>future others will judge the difference between our estimates of betterness
>and their own.
>
>We see betterness existing in the past based on our conceptions in the
>present. It is most certainly not fundamental or essential to the workings
>of the world. But the true nature of this Pollyanna nonsense is the
>reluctance to even talk about worseness. One advocate of the betterness
>principle once replied that if an asteroid smacked the earth, it would only
>seem to be worseness. Ultimate betterness would be served in the end. This
>is a view so vacuous as to be unworthy of discussion.
>


Greetings Krimel,

I have gone so far as to state that Quality is amoral.  Both Platt 
and Arlo immediately started throwing quotes at me.   I presented the 
water analogy:  If everything is water, and there is nothing that is 
not water, then there is no meaning to water, for there is no way of 
distinguishing a duality or difference between water and 
nonwater.   It seems to me, if there were a morality to the MoQ, it 
would reside in the 3rd and 4th levels.  Do you agree, or not?

Marsha