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 / 9191
9190  |  9192
Subject: 
Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:27:13 GMT
Viewed: 
1624 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, James Brown writes:

Snip.

> Might makes right is, simplified, the belief that force is the ultimate
> arbiter of any conflict; in other words, that morality is external, and
> derived from enforcement.

I would not agree with the above definition, but rather offer this one instead:

MMR is the belief that there *is* no morality. whatever you have the power
to do is OK, with no objective standard to be held to whether internal or
external. There are no rights to anything, everything is amoral.

> Moral relativism holds that morality is ultimately a subjective belief, and
> doesn't go any farther than that.  There are derivations from and
> consequences of that basic concept, but that's it, in a nutshell.

I think maybe it's the very commonly cited consequence that you can't judge
someone else's morality as inferior by an objective standard that I have an
issue with, as that is unacceptable.  But if it's an immutable consequence,
then the premise is unacceptable as well.



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
 
(...) Ah, then ok. I'm fine with that. Just so long as we make sure to clarify that the 'right' in MMR isn't a moral right. The only problem being, though, that while theoretically true, it's not the case in reality, only because human moral codes (...) (26 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
  Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
 
(...) Ok. I think that 'morality...derived from enforcement' and 'whatever you have the power to do is OK' are equivalent statements, but that's just quibbling. (...) That consequence does follow fairly directly, so I guess that's where it fails for (...) (26 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
 
(...) No, I think you've got it backwards. Moral relativism is (essentially) stating that morality is subjective & internal, while 'might makes right' is stating that moral action is anything that can be enforced. I've started to go further about (...) (26 years ago, 31-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

36 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
    

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