SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (100220)6/5/2003 2:00:25 AM
From: D. Long  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
You've changed the debate.

You implied that one kind of killing is equivelant to all other kinds of killing. That kind of absolutism is totally divorced from any consideration of a moral rule, whatsoever, unless it is argue for strong pacifism.

Your Napoleon slide comes down to an attempt at a refutation of a Utilitarian argument for killing Napoleon on historical inevitability grounds. That's pretty debateable. Nazi Germany likely may never have existed without the charisma and driving ideas of Adolf Hitler, and Revolutionary France arguably may have been crushed early on without the tactical genius of Napoleon. There's no reason to believe the French revolution was inevitable, or inevitably successful. If the Bourbons would have been better at resolving the debt crisis that brought the monarchy down, the French republic may never have been. There might today have still been a French Roi across the channel from the English Queen.

Derek
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News