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: TimF who wrote (70949)	7/23/2003 7:52:13 PM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"But if objective morality exists, "correct" and "incorrect" have meaning when we are discussing ethics." Forgive my intrusion: I believe Lazarus was discussing Absolute morality not objective morality. You probably missed the posts, but some of us were discussing the possibility of a moral code that does or does not involve any sense or idea.

To: TimF who wrote (70949)	7/24/2003 10:55:40 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Thje non-existence of an absolute code does NOT mean that a society can not invent a code whose purpose is to, as much as possible, insure its own smooth, strifeless running. Against that code, actions can be judged moral or immoral. But they cannot be so judged against a nonexistent absolute code. And individual persons will have their own differences with the common code. And different societies will have differing codes. Which is exactly what is seen to exist.