Debate : 14444


Off-Topic / Debate / 14444	14443 \| 14445

Subject:	...but Japan didn't agree with that assessment.
Newsgroups:	lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date:	Wed, 31 Oct 2001 22:13:23 GMT
Viewed:	224 times

In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes: > "Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message > > > Moral relativism is a bankrupt idea. > > Are you saying moral objectivism is the correct path? If so, on what should > it be based? The bible? The Koran? Book of Mormon? General principles, agreeable to all people? Something like the UDHR? The bulk of world opinion? > I would have thought you'd have said moral relativism was *good* idea? See the subject line for relativism, at least in the perceptual sense. LFB

Message has 1 Reply:

		Re: ...but Japan didn't agree with that assessment.
(...) That would be fun establishing? (...) So we should "go with the flow", accept morals which we as individuals do not agree with? I'm not saying either moral relativism or objectivism is "wrong" or "right", I just think most of us operate in the (...) (23 years ago, 1-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:

		.. but japan was 'beat' by the time the main island was reached.
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message (...) Are you saying moral objectivism is the correct path? If so, on what should it be based? The bible? The Koran? Book of Mormon? I would have thought you'd have said moral relativism (...) (23 years ago, 31-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

19 Messages in This Thread:

Entire Thread on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:: Nested: All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear: All | Brief | Compact

Custom Search