[MD] How far do you go to preserve individual life?

[Magnus Berg]

"Platt Holden" <plattholden at gmail.com> wrote:
>Magnus,
>
>Let me see if I understand you. Are you saying that you disagree with the
>following from Pirsig:?
>
>"It says that what is meant by "human rights" is usually the moral code of
>intellect vs.society, the moral right
>of intellect to be free of social control. Freedom of speech, freedom of
>assembly, of travel, trial by jury, habeas
>corpus, government by consent -- these "human rights" are all intellect
>vs.society issues. According to the
>Metaphysics of Quality, these "human rights" have not just a sentimental
>basis, but a rational, metaphysical
>basis. They are essential to the evolution of life from a lower level of
>life. They are for real." (Lila, 24)

I'm saying that the world isn't that black and white as that quote makes 
it seem. Just this morning (Swedish time), you pulled another quote (one 
of the LC comments) where Pirsig asserted society's right to control its 
biological inhabitants. Don't you realize that the two quotes, the LC 
quote and the one you provided here are directly contradictory? One 
quote asserts the individual human's morality over society, and the 
other society's morality over the individual human!

How does that work?

The answer is stacks. The original question is hard because it's not 
black and white. Depending on which stack you focus on, you get a 
different answer.

	Magnus