[MD] subject/object: pragmatism

[Platt Holden]

> > [Krimel]
> > And yet you frequently argue from the point of view of the superiority of
> > your particular culture and its particular set of moral codes. But I would
> > agree to some extent with the idea that it is better to exist than not.
> 
> [Platt]
> I argue for the superiority of a particular culture based on Pirsig's moral
> hierarchy, as he explained:
> 
> "A culture that supports the dominance of social values over biological
> values is an absolutely superior culture to one that does not, and a culture
> that supports the dominance of intellectual values over social values is
> absolutely superior to one that does not. It is immoral to speak against a
> people because of the color of their skin, or any other genetic
> characteristic because these are not changeable and don't matter anyway. But
> it is not immoral to speak against a person because of his cultural
> characteristics if those cultural characteristics are-immoral. These are
> changeable and they do matter." (Lila, 24)
> 
> In other words, I think multiculturism based on the premise that all 
> cultures are morally equal is bunk, the British teacher in Sudan facing 6
> months in prison and 40 lashes for allowing her class to name a teddy bear
> Mohammed being a current case in point. 
> 
> [Krimel]
> I find judging the actions of people in one culture by the standards of
> another culture to be about the most morally reprehensible thing I can
> imagine.

[Platt]
So there is no moral difference between Western and Muslim law, especially 
in regards to status and treatment of women? 

> >From the stand point of evolution diversity is in some sense THE highest
> good. It represents freedom and a broader range of options. When
> circumstances undergo change diversity of options is often the difference
> between existence continuing and existence ending.

[Platt]
A good argument for defending individual freedom from cultures that smother 
it.