My truths are the terminal and instrumental values that define the world as I would like it to be. So when you come down to it, all my truths are selfish. One of my truths is that it's wrong for me to take more than my fair share. I operate that way because, if everyone would do that, the world would be a fairer place and that suits me.
But that there is even such a thing as a fair share or that the oportunity for self-actualizing is good could be considered absolute truths in a sense even if they are perhaps more fuzzy then things like a belief in a free market or that fetuses have a right to life or that they don't but instead women have a right to an abortion (note all uses of right above are in the sense of "natural right", not in the sense of legal rights). It is possible that all of these things are not abstract beliefs as much as a feeling that you think we should do what has the best overall result, but then that is the abstract value you support? And of course what the best overall result is would be a very debatable topic.
. I think you're talking about more absolute truths than that.
Do you believe in any absolute truths? Do you, even if you don't believe in any specific absolute truth, believe the concept of absolute truth makes sense and that there might be some absolute truth? If someone holds a political positition based on his or her opinion about absolute truth would you consider that in a sense to be a religious opinion even if it is not about the existance, nature, or ideas from or about a devine entity of some sort? Generally I would say no, and say that a radical environmentalist or a commited Marxist might have beliefs that have simularities to a fundementalist religon but that the beliefs are not actually religious because they are not about God.
When the world gets there, then we can elevate the status of a fetus. Doing so now is like McCoy's girlfriend.
The difference is that McCoy's girlfriend was one woman although of course and injustice against one person is still an injustice. Also I believe they just let her die instead of killing her (its been a long time since I've seen that episode). I also apparently believe that overcrowding and exhaustion of natural resorces as a problem for either the US or the world as a whole is less of a problem then you seem to, but that is a whole seperate conversation. Despite the specific objections I do understand your analogy, and I do agree that there would be negative consiquences of a ban on abortion, we just disagree as to the severity of the consiquences and the awefullness of the current situation.
In other matters
I think that the ethical vegetarians will be shown to be right
About what specifically. Some of their claims (about the conditions of livestock, or the pain animals feel) are specific facts. Other claims are abstract moral ideas, which may or may not be right but I can't see how they could be shown to be right.
I think that pacifists will inherit the earth, but I wouldn't unilaterally disarm now.
Optimism combined with pragmatism not a bad combination, unfortunatly I can't share your optimism.
Tim |
