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 / 2106
2105  |  2107
Subject: 
Re: History as hearsay (was Re: 22/7 & infinities (was: Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil?)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Wed, 8 Sep 1999 22:36:58 GMT
Viewed: 
1551 times
  
David Eaton wrote in message ...
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
I'm reading it... Not sure where it is going, but I will say this.
Morals are relative only to the extent that some are better than others.
I hold any morality that says it is OK to violate rights as inferior to
one that does not.

Where is it going... hmmm.... the basic arguments (forgive any misquotes,
John D):
Q: Are actions good solely by their consequences, or is there an underlying
morality which judges them regardless?
A: I think we're more or less agreed at this point in time that there is an
underlying morality which judges actions. I'd say both rights (justice) and
charity fit into moral actions, John says just rights.

Q: What is justice/morality based on?
A: I say it's rooted in emotion which is dealt with logically, John • heretofor
has argued it's solely logical (although he acknowledged an emotional root • in
his most recent post... maybe we're not arguing too much after all... we'll
see).

Q: Is there a universal morality?
A: I say not really, if there was, it'd have to be infinitely long, John • says
there is one, relatively short, but it would satisfy everyone's moral • questions
once and for all if it were known (but whether they abide by it is another
issue)

Q: Is the Adventures Egyptian theme cool?
A: Yes (both of us)

As to history being hearsay. Hmm... Sometimes. And sometimes not. I'd
like to think that the Holocaust is pretty well documented as having
actually happened. Calling it hearsay would do a disservice to the
millions who suffered atrocities at the hands of members of the species
(but not their fellow men... to do that to a person is to renounce your
right to be considered human).

I'd have to agree. More recent and documented history is much less hearsay, • as
I see it. As for history about the great flood, the exodus, atlantis, etc., • a
lot of that is much more hearsay. But it's pretty tough to deny recent
documented history. Plus, it doesn't get you anywhere. If you say that • history
is completely hearsay, then what would you say the "real" history is, and • what
would you base that on? Why bother calling it hearsay, if it's sufficiently
proven? Anyway, mute for more ancient history. That's much more difficult • to
say much about.

I, believe it or not, have a hard time reconciling my desire for the US
not to be the worlds policeman with my desire that we never allow things
like the Holocaust to happen again.

Where is the line? Do we allow one person to be killed, one thousand?
one million? When do we need to take a decision that our country is
threatened by atrocities being committed elsewhere.

Just on that note, I think I agree with you; I'm just not sure about the • "real"
reasons we entered into WWII anyway.  I'm sure it's not like we were • content to
let them fight until we heard of the atrocities going on over there, and • then
jumped at the chance to fight the world's evil. However, it would be nice • if we
could guarantee that our government would only act in the intrests of good,
rather than of self-interest.


  I think it would be nicer if we could say our country did what we did
because it was in our self interest, because we are striving for good, but I
doubt it.

--
   Have fun!
   John
AUCTION Page (More soon!)
http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/2-many-toys/
TRADE Page http://www114.pair.com/ig88/lego/index.htm
MOC,CA++++(6035)SW,TR,old(456)+++TO++PI,SP+DU--#+++++
ig88888888@stlnet.com & IG88888888 on AOL
DaveE



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: 22/7 & infinities (was: Re: The nature of the JC god, good or evil?)
 
(...) (I've been peeking at this debate, but have refused to get involved... sigh, how I weaken) It almost sounds as if you are referring to Utilitarianism until this point... Perhaps it's the definition of "life-affirming", which is left a little (...) (25 years ago, 24-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

277 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