Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr
From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: THe Moral Value of Conformity
Message-ID: <1679@pyuxd.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 12-Sep-85 21:11:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: pyuxd.1679
Posted: Thu Sep 12 21:11:07 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 13-Sep-85 05:16:06 EDT
References: <1647@pyuxd.UUCP> <1524@umcp-cs.UUCP> <2619@ihnss.UUCP>
Organization: Whatever we're calling ourselves this week
Lines: 20

> Conformity is submission to the values of others and does constitute a moral
> choice to act against ones own values (else it would not be conformity).
> Non-conformity is a similar submission to the antithesis of others values.
> Both are forms of moral self abuse;  I agree with RichR's repugnance...
>  [LATIMER]

I disagree with your definitions only slightly here.  I see non-conformity
as, not an absolute rejection of anything and everything involving other
people's values, but as a recognition that it is your choice, to choose which
things you want and don't want.  Choosing the opposite of everything society
claims is "right" is indeed a form of "moral self abuse", but I don't think
that non-conformity implies that absolute a rejection.  It merely means that
you choose based on your needs and wants.  To choose based on it being the
opposite of societal doctrine is just as anti-human and anti-self as the
voluntary submission TO that doctrine.  Similarly, belonging to an
anti-conformist group and living up to THEIR required norms is trading in one
taskmaster for another.  Remember Steve Martin's "The Non-Conformist Oath"?
-- 
"Meanwhile, I was still thinking..."
				Rich Rosen  ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr