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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (85329)	11/10/2004 11:02:03 AM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793820

Forgetaboutit say Russians in UNSCAM FRIENDS OF SADDAM Russia has been wary of a graft probe into the UN-run Iraq oil-for-food program as its companies would be among the first candidates to come under scrutiny. Russian officials have expressed reservations over the UN inquiry and described it as a "historical inquiry", with diplomats arguing that Moscow did not want to look backward into the history of the old issue of the Iraqi humanitarian program. Russia has also insisted that accusations of oil-for-food graft were intended to elbow the Russians away from Iraqi riches.

To: LindyBill who wrote (85329)	11/10/2004 11:22:24 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793820

I understand. One shouldn't make moral judgements, should one? It's not about making or not making moral judgments. It's about communication. "Right" and "wrong" are not very useful words, really. Unless you live in an absolutist world, that is, when their lack of specificity doesn't matter. And when you use those words, you're suggesting an authoritarian religious basis for the judgment. There are lots of ways that something could be right. It could be right because it's the generous or kind thing to do or the sensible thing or the healthy thing or the constructive thing, to use some of my favorite substitutes. Something could be wrong because it's destructive or unhealthy or illegal or strategically flawed or ignorant or selfish. You get a lot more information when you choose a more useful word. And you avoid inaccurate connotations. If I say something is constructive or nonconstructive, then I'm still making a moral judgment just as if I'd said "right" or "wrong." When we say it's wrong to drink, for example, what are we saying. It depends. Is drinking really immoral? I don't see how. But drinking can lead to some behavior considered immoral. It can get you into fights or into the wrong bed or a car accident or ruin your health. All those things have moral implications. But is drinking immoral? If you can drink in a way that avoids those consequences, then there's nothing inherently immoral about it. Saying that drinking is just plain wrong is not very useful. "Useful" is another of my favorite substitute words.