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: epicure who wrote (30504)	9/30/2001 8:53:47 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Even the most hardwired predilections are not "absolutely wired". Humans have a relative skill for language, which once the opportunity closes, becomes relatively gone. Why would any aspect of our consciousness NOT be that way? If armless people can use their toes to paint, why should we expect any different types of specialization for our ethical centers? If ethics arise from the brain, then by definition they have to be learned and will largely follow the informational paradigms provided during the learning phase. Hence, they are absolutely based upon the standards of community (reference group). This observer dependence is what makes it relative. I'm not getting this anymore than when my Ethics prof said it 20 years ago. I don't think its because I'm stupid or ignorant. I don't accept the thesis of a Platonic form for right and wrong acts. It depends (it always depends). Is it okay to eat a person? It depends. Is it okay to kill someone? It depends. Is it okay to torture someone? It's hard for me to say, but that too, I suppose, depends.