Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site amdahl.UUCP Path: utzoo!decvax!decwrl!sun!gam From: gam@amdahl.UUCP (Gordon A. Moffett) Newsgroups: net.philosophy,net.religion Subject: Re:Re: Next! Message-ID: <815@amdahl.UUCP> Date: Sat, 29-Dec-84 05:26:01 EST Article-I.D.: amdahl.815 Posted: Sat Dec 29 05:26:01 1984 Date-Received: Sun, 30-Dec-84 00:18:14 EST References: <2151@umcp-cs.UUCP> Distribution: net Organization: Amdahl Corp, Sunnyvale CA Lines: 33 Xref: sun net.philosophy:1273 net.religion:5130 > = Paul V Torek, umcp-cs!flink > I said that often *people call* things morally wrong that are entirely > consistent with the other aspects of their culture. Examples? Slavery, > U.S., 1850 -- the abolitionist movement. Libertarianism, Marxism, or > just about any ideological movement in its infancy. All these groups > were critics of their cultures. QED. > > --The accomplished iconoclast, Your examples are consistent with the Behaviorist model. In each instance, the things called "morally wrong" are seen as threats to the longevity of the culture (though they are a part of it). Marxism, too, was saying that Capitalism was a *completed step* in social development but its usefulness had ended, and was now a threat to successful continuation of the culture. These "cultual dissonances" are reactions not to destroy the culture but to preserve it, possibly in an altered form. (Also we might make subjective observations that the abolitionists were right -- they succeded -- and the Socialists were wrong -- they did not succede (in capitalist economies)). We seek to eliminate actions we feel are "morally wrong" because the consequences of not doing so are social (cultural) disintegration. Quid Malberg in Plano. -- Gordon A. Moffett ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,sun}!amdahl!gam 37 22'50" N / 121 59'12" W [ This is just me talking. ]