Subject:
|
Re: Essay on Emerson vs. Thoreau; civil disobedience
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:27:13 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
446 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:
Message is in Reply To:
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
|
|
|
|