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. ]