Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (24222)	8/23/2001 9:20:42 AM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 82486

do you see how this becomes an absolute? Jorj, I had never seen it expressed that way before. Elegant. Karen

To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (24222)	8/23/2001 10:56:36 AM
From: one_less	Respond to of 82486

Certainly seems like PM stuff to me, and a very open minded position at that.

To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (24222)	8/23/2001 12:47:07 PM
From: Greg or e	Respond to of 82486

Hi Jorj I am sorry if I misrepresented your position, I was just talking about the two logical extremes, Absolute laws, based on the character of an absolute law giver, or given that no law giver exists, the logical conclusion that we have to make them up as we go. You seem to land somewhere in the middle, I don't find that to be compellingly logical but you are of course entitled to your view. You seem to hold that "enlightened self interest" leads to the same destination as those who travel the other route, without having to haul the baggage of religion around with you. I would simply beg to differ and ask you this. If the average pedophile could abuse whatever child he wished and knew for certain that he would never get caught, and thereby have to suffer the consequences of his actions, Why would that be wrong? Why is the idea of a collective good anymore valid than the idea that one must gather all the personal gusto that one can, before they die? If there is no grounding for your view other than personal preference, I would suggest that is not very firm. Simply stating that just the way things are is a statement, not an argument. Why are they that way, and could a fixed moral order be a clue that there is fixed moral order giver? That would seem most likely to me. Greg