To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 11588
11587  |  11589
Subject: 
Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Tue, 10 Jul 2001 23:27:28 GMT
Viewed: 
1361 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes:
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Brown writes:

That is *exactly* what we are doing when we say the lion is amoral.  We are
saying that our morals do not apply to it.

Uh, no, by the definitions you gave (and my understanding also) amoral does
not specifically relate to _our_ (human) morals, but _any_ morals.

Yes, you're right.  My imprecision.  What I meant was: "We are saying that
morals do not apply to it."

Mea culpa, mea culpa.


James



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Did animals have rights before we invented rights?
 
(...) Uh, no, by the definitions you gave (and my understanding also) amoral does not specifically relate to _our_ (human) morals, but _any_ morals. (...) ROSCO (Never let it be said that *I* let this thread die!) (23 years ago, 10-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

244 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR