[MD] Sex, Rape and Law in a MOQ

[118]

Hi Arlo,
Some further discussion below.

On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 12:29 PM, ARLO J BENSINGER JR <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:
> [Mark]
> Yes you do.  You state that rape law is meant to control the biological.  I am
> discussing this with you in a respective manner.
>
> [Arlo]
> No I did not. I said, again, "rape law" (intellectual patterns) are meant to
> control "rape stigma" (social patterns) which are in turn meant to control
> sexual behavior (biological patterns).

[Mark]
OK, we can disagree here too.  If anything, rape laws increase rape stigma.
>
> [Mark before]
> Yes, I can see your Western logic here.
>
> [Arlo]
> You said this several times and its nothing more than an empty attempt at a
> pejorative. I could start of every one of my responses to you with a similar
> dismissal, if you like.

[Mark]
No, It is not a pejorative or dismissal.  Truth dictates from the top
down, as you are stating.  Quality dictates from the bottom up.  If
this is a sense dismissal, then I am sorry.  I derived this from ZMM
and other books of the time.  You are looking at things from the wrong
side, the Western side, not the Quality side.  Quality is closer to
Tao in its philosophy that it is to Platonism.  This is what I mean by
Western thought.  This is where you are.
>
> [Mark before]
> You are applying intellectual patterns to justify intellectual patterns.  This
> will not work.
>
> [Arlo]
> This makes no sense at all.

[Mark]
Makes sense to me.  You are proposing an intellectual argument to
support the intellectual sense of truth.  Dictating from the top down.
 This is similar to the brain thinking it is the most important organ.
 If it dies, the rationale is that the person is dead.  Now, I am not
for life support, this is also an intellectual argument, again made by
the brain.  I am just using examples to get through to you.
>
> [Mark before]
> I do see rape more as an intrusion into personal freedom or personal property
> if you want.
>
> [Arlo]
> The social level sees "rape" as an intrusion on property but based on the view
> that the "victim" is the property of someone else; hence the "immorality" of
> the act as seen from the social level.
>
> The intellectual level corrects the social level by seeing "rape" as a form of
> violence, immoral because it violates the person's freedom to control their
> body.

[Mark]
I would disagree with your notion of "corrects", but OK.
>
> This is why on the social level, husbands could not rape their wives. By
> definition, their wives were their property, so "raping" them was impossible.
> It is only on the intellectual level does "freedom" appear where the view is on
> the individual's control of their own body. And, it is also why on the
> biological level, "rape" does not exist.

[Mark]
OK, except freedom starts at the inorganic level.  We have
conceptualized it, nothing more.
>
> [Mark before]
> Yes you can, but it doesn't lead anywhere new.
>
> [Arlo]
> Sure it does, it fits a MOQ to the "T" (or the "M" as it were).

[Mark]
In my opinion it does not.
>
[Arlo]
> The social level, being one-up from the biological, views the act as sexual,
> and uses shame, humiliation and violence (again, often against the victim as
> well). You can see this clearly in cultures dominated by social patterns.
>
> On the intellectual level, it sees the act as one of violence, a social act
> rather than a sexual one, and "rape laws" were enacted to control the social
> level not the biological one. I think is quite clear in cultures dominated by
> intellectual patterns.

[Mark]
Cultures are dominated by the inorganic level.  I don't know how else
to put this.  The rape laws are a social consequence of the biological
level. Society does not control it.  How would a more simple level
control a more complex one?  Do the equations depicting the motion of
the planets control the planets?
>
> [Mark before]
> Let me suggest that the biological urges create and therefore dominate the
> social expression of rape laws.
>
> [Arlo]
> Rape laws, like free speech laws, are intellectual patterns, not social
> patterns.
>
> Can you explain to me how you think "biological urges" create and dominate
> social patterns? How does "sex" create "rape"? Why should "sex" dominate "rape"?

[Mark]
Social, or intellectual patterns if you wish, are a result of
biological urges as you say.  I am not sure if the word urge is meant
to be pejorative or not.  I certainly hope not, it would make your
life meaningless.
>
> [Mark before]
> It is impossible to dominate from the top down.
>
> [Arlo]
> I see "dominance" more like gardening, getting rid of the weeds to help the
> plant grow. The social level's attempts to "dominate" biology are an act of
> self-preservation. The same is true of intellect/society. Laws protecting
> free-speech are intellectual "domination" of the social level, where people
> could be stoned for voicing ideas.

[Mark]
OK, we differ then in how we see dominance.  At least this rectifies
some.  Gardening is simplifying the garden, not controlling it.  You
cannot tell the plants how fast to grow.  Laws simplify the social
level in the same way.  They cannot control it.
>
>
>
Cheers,
Mark
>
>
> 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/md/archives.html
>