the other day in class i gave a speech about the death penalty and i spent
about six or seven minutes (the entire thing was twenty, the requirement was
5-6) giving a very basic explanation of the moq- the four levels, and how it
relates to the death penalty. the main point i tried to stress was the idea
of human beings as 'collections of thought,' and therefore inextricably tied
to the intellectual level, making society's removal of them an immoral act,
society being a lower level of evolution than intellectual. maybe these
kids' parents are all staunch colonel blimps or something, because when i got
done, everyone attacked me with their belief that they need to see closure
and that even if the person commiting the crime was a minor, they should
still be executed and everything. that was all simply emotion though, and i
defended it pretty well, but what i want to know is where exactly does
emotion and personal conviction tie into the moq? if i can prove logically
the folly of the death penalty in contemporary society, (i used plenty of
statistics about wrongful deaths, the failure of it to reduce crime, the
prejudicing against minorities, etc.) why do people still cling to their
views harder than ever? it's not like i expected to change their minds or
anything, but it seemed like they didnt even think about what i said before
attacking me. how does pirsig define emotional attachment within the moq?
im new here, and this whole death penalty thing has probably been brought up
before, and if it has been, my apologies.
rasheed
ps i got a 69% on my speech because in my introduction i played the
'ezekiel 25:17' part from pulp fiction to explain my stance, which my teacher
wasnt too keen on.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
