[MD] Bo's right! For all the wrong reasons? (Part2)

[David Thomas]

Hi Ian,

> But isn't that just the "little knowledge" argument Dave ... is a
> dangerous thing.
> 
> Clearly, in the wrong hands the ill-advised with ill-intent, could do
> a lot of moral damage with ... just about anything.
> 
> My view is pragmatic. Name a preferable metaphysics, or working
> world-view / model, or suggest why giving up seeking to find
> improvement is preferable to "what the heck, it's not worth the effort
> of managing the risks".
> 
> I've no illusions over the MoQ's imperfections, and Pirsig's
> imperfections are manifest, but ... so ... what ...

I guess what scares me is the rigid structure of moral dominance with the
intellectual level seen as the highest level of static good coupled with a
mystical, undefined, quasi-religious DQ  and pragmatism could lead to
newness of ideas by default being equated to goodness of ideas. I think this
is what happened in part with the application of Darwin's work to societies
prior to any real understanding of it's consequences.

Dave