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 (70765)	7/17/2003 5:22:57 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Why is it a cheap shot? You wrote "There are no absolute moral principles that can be held by some but not others." That means that every one of the six billion people on earth must agree before a principle can be considered an absolute moral principle. Why is that a cheap shot? If you want to modify your original statement, which I think personally you need to do, fine. But as long as you're going to hold that position, my objection stands as valid and not a cheap shot at all. Also, when you wrote "nor have I argued that there should be absolute applications of absolute moral principles," you lost me. If something is an absolute moral principle, how can it ever be good not to apply it?