Re: Re: MD Is Morality Relative?

From: Ian Glendinning (ian@psybertron.org)
Date: Fri Dec 03 2004 - 23:20:34 GMT

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "Re: MD Is Morality Relative?"

    Erin, Steve,

    Yes, yes & yes, which is in fact to affrim the question in the subject line.

    Ian
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Erin
      To: moq_discuss@moq.org
      Sent: Friday, December 03, 2004 5:01 AM
      Subject: Re: Re: MD Is Morality Relative?

      Hi Steve,
      I think you are asking good questions, wish I could be more of assistance in answering them. I particularly liked...
      Does relativity suggest that there really is no right or wrong or merely that
      right and wrong are context dependent?

      The doctor and germ quote which justifies killing in some contexts is often brought up by and also that the killings of 9/11 acts not justified and so is that accepting context or no?
      Seems that if you accept the existence of 4 levels and use them to justify when killing is wrong or right you have to accept context-dependent morals to some extent.

      Erin

      Steve Peterson <peterson.steve@verizon.net> wrote:
        Hi Platt, All

        Platt said:
    > A relative morality believes that whatever is right is whatever works in
    > society to assure inner harmony. Thus, one society should not judge the
    > ethical practices of another.
    >

        Is this really what is meant by Moral Relativity?

        What is Moral Absolutism?

        Are there other types of morality?

        Does absolutism suggest that an act is either right or wrong in and of itself
        or are the results or intent important?

        Does relativity suggest that there really is no right or wrong or merely that
        right and wrong are context dependent?

        Does such a distinction have any meaning in practice since the MOQ suggests
        that all people behave based on a combination of physical laws, biological
        desires and aversions, tradition/authority/status-seeking, and reason?

        I think w! e need to agree on what is meant by the terms of discussion before
        deciding whether the MOQ supports one or the other or neither.

        Can anyone suggests definitions for the two sides of the debate?

        Thanks,
        Steve

        MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
        Mail Archives:
        Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
        Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
        MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

        To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
        http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Dec 04 2004 - 01:22:23 GMT