From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Wed Dec 04 2002 - 09:10:53 MST
Peter writes
> [Lee writes]
> >are very puzzling to me. I have not been able to translate
> >"X is wrong" into anything more definite (or as definite)
> >as "the speaker disapproves of X".
>
> That's not true. You had just posted a message which did translate
> it into something more definite (and almost correct):
By "translate", Peter, I meant to be taking the speaker's
intent into account. Since to me "X is wrong" is so
muddled, I refuse to be so charitable and go so far as
to think that the speaker *actually* means
> >Because the latter statement implies only the truth, namely
> >that the speaker's and most people's *values* are violated
> >by x. By speaking of something as MORALLY WRONG an effort
> >is made to speak in the objective mode, so that what is
> >conveyed is a claim, backed by the judgment and authority
> >of the speaker, that x has a universal failing, and that
> >anyone ought to be able to see that.
>
> Saying that murder is wrong says several things that can probably be
> tested, including:
> - that societies which deter murder accomplish some generally agreed
> upon goals better than societies that condone murder.
> - that people feel an obligation to exert more effort at deterring murder
> than would be the case if murder was merely distasteful in the way that
> cauliflower is.
Well, yes, it may be the case that that is what the
speaker would like to claim by "X is wrong", if it
happened to occur to him or her, but that's not what
people usually *mean* by "X is wrong". Like I say,
it usually means only that IMO their epistemology
or ontology is screwed up.
> Anyone who is truly interested in a good description of what
> rights are should ignore Lee's attempts at obfuscation
why thanks, Peter. I can see that you misunderstand
my intent completely.
> and read David Friedman's paper "A Positive Account of Property Rights" at:
> http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Property/Property.html
Why should I waste my time on posts that have stupid or
meaningless insults tossed about with such abandon when
I have many serious correspondents on this list?
Lee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:34 MST