[MD] Is this the inadequacy of the MOQ?

[rapsncows at fastmail.fm]

dmb,
   I never advocated murder.  If I ever for a second thought that the
   murder I talked about conceptually was moral, or if I thought that my
   intelligent argument for it would win, I would never have posted it. 
   Of course I am opposed to it and if anyone offered such an argument
   as a sincere suggestion I would think him a nut and probably want to
   tie him down.  But, there are things that are less cut and dry.  And
   furthermore, if ever someone did appear before me with such an
   argument, what would I have to say to him in response.  Telling him
   that he sounds crazy, or that animals wouldn't stoop so low I don't
   think would have any effect.  He would say: those aren't intelligent
   arguments.  Right?

The question is, if that hypothetical child murderer were real, how do
you classify him according to MoQ?  His argument must be classified as
being in the intellectual level.  Right?  So my question is then, how do
we distinguish quality within the intellectual level itself?

Further, in other societies certain murders are looked on with favor. 
And even in your own, I suspect, there are times at the margins where it
is okay.  But, back to other societies, in certain muslim countries,
there are honor killings.  This even goes to the extreme that if a girl
is raped, perhaps if she was out when she shouldn't have been out, or
she went somewhere she shouldn't have gone, or she was with someone with
whom she shouldn't have been, her father will murder her because she has
become a dishonor to the family.  To me, and I must assume to you, this
sounds atrocious.  We may think it a low quality intelligence that
arrives at that position, but how am I to intellectually win an argument
with that muslim father to save his daughter?

And if 'win' regarding this argument has no meaning within the MoQ, well
then how can you say that that position is not intelligent?

Tim

On Wed, 3 Nov 2010 21:54:32 -0600, "david buchanan"
<dmbuchanan at hotmail.com> said:
> 
> 
> Tim said:
> About murder I would just add, dmb, that it was my point that the
> argument in support of the murder I highlighted was an intelligent
> argument.  If might not be very intelligent, but it was in the level of
> intelligence none-the-less?  My point is, how is intelligence judged?
> What makes intelligence intelligence?  How can one assign any qualitative
> (or quantitative) distinction to any intelligent proposition?  Perhaps we
> need a new word, but I have been recycling 'objective'.
> 
> 
> dmb says:
> 
> I'm not even making a philosophical point here, Tim. I'm just talking
> about human decency and common sense. If you're smart enough to
> understand the word "murder" then you should realize how crazy you sound.
> An intelligent argument in favor of child murder? There are animals that
> wouldn't stoop that low. You really don't see what a monstrously evil
> idea that is? How could such a thing ever be considered "intelligent" or
> "intellectual"? 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  		 	   		  
> 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
-- 
  
  rapsncows at fastmail.fm

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class