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: Solon who wrote (71022)	7/28/2003 12:38:53 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"As I said, you attached the word "Absolute" to your "moral" idea time and time again. As I have told you time and time again, the use of the word "Absolute" in meta-ethics refers to an Absolute ground which by definition exists apart from subjective human nature." This has been the basis of my argument. Even though you have represented it in your own words as usual. The problem comes when you draw in other elements of the arguement that you also define as my position and which I have not included. I am perfectly capable of bringing my own elements into the argument and arguing them. When you add (every time you post) some aspect of my argument that I have not stated. Then I point out as clearly as possible that this is not my position, it becomes rediculous for you to argue that it is. Apparently that doesn't make sense to you. You think you should be able to define my argument for me (even when I disagree with it) and then argue with me over the points that in many cases, I don't even dissagree with. ... Pointless