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: one_less who wrote (64936)	10/30/2002 6:44:48 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

You realize, I hope, that those are works attempting to apply the word to classes of people, and are not actually about the word itself.

To: one_less who wrote (64936)	10/30/2002 6:52:09 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

This discussion about conscience has been hard to follow. Like many of the discussions, it's having trouble getting past the usage of words. As the dictionary says, having a conscience means recognizing an ethical framework and a preference for doing what's right. Someone without a conscience is either a psychopath (no ethical framework) or evil(no preference for doing what's right). "Fanatic" is a different construct. It's about excess and preoccupation. One can both be a fanatic and have a conscience. If someone does things we consider evil, it could be because they don't have a conscience. It could also be their conscience has a different ethical framework. I think, after all our discussions on related subjects, that you and I operate similarly out of conscience. Neither of us is a fanatic. That means only that we're pretty balanced and mellow, which fanatics aren't.