--WebTV-Mail-946856536-745 Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Whoa- Psypher, what a dark pessimistic vision.
Morality is based upon WHAT WORKS and WHAT DOESNT in a contextual setting. Right for me, or wrong for me, right for the group, or wrong for the group. A balancing act of values in a flux. Social and individual values/morals.
Let us say there is a small watering hole in a tribal community. It is fed quite slowly, so the community has standards based upon that practical knowledge. The "rules" are broken when someone takes more than their share, rendering the rest of the tribe low on water. Now that is "wrong" in the context of survival for the group. Wrong IS sometimes what the group or the vote count determines. If you dont like it, you have to move to someplace where wrong is right.
A polygamous society would have different sexual mores than a monogamous society. It is what works within a system that is good, for you or me or a tribe. Pragmatic cooperation within this competitive sphere sets the right balance of interests for the common good. Democracy (or "attempted" democracy!) has the best track record for this balancing act so far.
Maybe you are harsh because the "democracies" dont agree with your views. Democracy isnt pat. It is always in flux and never "complete". It is messy and chaotic. I dont know about you but I keep in touch with local, state and national politicians. I write editorial letters to newspapers too. I let them know in no uncertain terms what I think. You can't do that everywhere. And they do listen to me. I even contacted NATO with a target suggestion. It's gone now!
Look at the bright side and you might see what you can do to help, instead of the gloom. Have you made a donation to the Kosovar refugees yet? Do you value that as goodness? If so, why? Get with it, participate.
Did you go off your meds!???
.............jim
--WebTV-Mail-946856536-745 Content-Disposition: Inline Content-Type: Message/RFC822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Received: from mailsorter-101-2.bryant.webtv.net (209.240.198.96) by postoffice-152.iap.bryant.webtv.net; Mon, 24 May 1999 10:27:03 -0700 (PDT)
mailsorter-101-2.bryant.webtv.net (8.8.8/ms.graham.14Aug97) with ESMTP id KAA00122; Mon, 24 May 1999 10:27:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by maxwell.kumo.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) id LAA17533 for virus-outgoing; Mon, 24 May 1999 11:14:18 -0600From: "psypher" <overload@fastmail.ca>
> Psypher.....Are you confusing is and ought? There is reciprocity
> and symbiosis in a biologic sense as a human survival trait. Right,
> wrong, sharing and empathy are also intricate and central to Bonobo
> Chimp society. Power structures can poison the well, for sure, and
> yes, there ought to be a more just world. It still doesn't negate
> what is inborne and primal: morality in your personal dealings with
> your community and your loved ones.
...what are right and wrong? What basis do you have for making these judgements? What rational support can you give for the principles of sharing and empathy? What constitutes "morality in your personal dealings" and how are we to define immorality?
> Liberal Democracy is a brilliant self-correcting, self perpetuating
> ideology.
...ideology and practice are different things, as people keep
pointing out here. Liberal democracy may be a brilliant ideology but
as long as we don't actually manifest a democracy - where the people
have a voice in the structure of their communities - it will remain
theory.
...I realize that you and I are living under different regimes, but
surely you don't actually claim to be living in a democracy?
Nations that foster a marketplace of ideas, capital, and
> lifestyle choices will achieve more prosperity and justice.
...yes, but nations which foster those things within their own borders while deliberately perpetrating heinous circumstances on nonnationals are parasitic. A group of people bound together in common purpose may still be parasitic of that common purpose is harmful to another organism.
This
> system fits our phenotype to a tee.
...I honestly do not understand how you can live in the same world as me and believe this.
[snip]
> The mythological model of human nature was challenged by the
> enlightenment. The Marxist model was a complete failure in both
> market dynamics and intellectual capital. Science and democracy,
> which are both error detecting and self-correcting, have a long way
> to go to conquer the globe. Probably less than 25% of the earth's
> people have a true democracy
...I would say that perhaps approximately .00001 percent of the world
inhabit a true democracy, where the structure of their social system
is truly developed out of an attept to hear and honour the voices of
all the people. These people are the one's at the top of the
hierarchy. The rest of us are not consulted except to the extent that
we dominate those lower down.
...I live in Canada, we're one of the cushiest nations on the planet,
we don't have a "true democracy". The USA certainly does not have
anything approaching a true democracy. Rule of the people, by the
people, for the people - not in this world, bub.
....... And these countries are the
> healthiest.
...once again, I honestly do not see how you can live in the same world I inhabit and assert that it is possible to have healthy countries and non-healthy countries. The idea of a nation-state is an abstraction based on the application of military force and the bribery of its constituents. There is one humyn species and one planet only - the health of that system must be accounted for as a whole - otherwise it's analogous to saying "My arm is sick but my leg is well."
-psypher
--WebTV-Mail-946856536-745--