From: Scott Badger (wbadger@psyberlink.net)
Date: Mon Jul 06 1998 - 06:15:20 MDT
Daniel Fabulich <daniel.fabulich@yale.edu> wrote:
>On Sun, 5 Jul 1998, Scott Badger wrote:
>
>> I do completely agree with you that ethical standards are subjective and
>> fluidic (real word?).
>
>OK, I've got to butt in here. Philosophically speaking, you're making a
>rather lofty presumption which you have not at all defended. There are a
>large body of philosophers who claim that we can rationally determine what
>we ought to do, and thereby solve the problem of ethics. I find this
>position rather strong, since it seems to me that one cannot rationally
>disprove this, except possibly by showing how rationality cannot be used
>to make choices, an absurd claim.
>
Well, I said at the start that ethics was not my field. Thanks for butting
in. So, I'm interested to find out . . . what *are* some of the objective
and universally applicable ethical standards that have been rationally
derived by philosophers?
best regards,
s.b.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:17 MST