From: Alejandro Dubrovsky (s335984@student.uq.edu.au)
Date: Sun Jan 10 1999 - 23:14:15 MST
On Sun, 10 Jan 1999, Randall Randall wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Jan 1999, Alejandro Dubrovsky wrote:
> >On Sun, 10 Jan 1999, Terry Donaghe wrote:
>
> >But even if it is most of you (us?) it is still not objective. I think it
> <snip>
> >people). So according to objective morality, do these people not exist?
> >are they explainable as noise in the data?
>
> Objectivity does not imply universal agreement. Evolution is no less an
> objective fact because there are sizable populations who violently
> disagree that it is true. While I do not consider myself an objectivist,
> I do not believe that objectivity can be established by vote.
>
But evolution exists independent of what humans think (barring any silent
tree-felling kind of arguments), while morality is solely a creation of
this activity (unless a god exists, but i don't think that is what Terry
Donaghe was suggesting), therefore suggesting an objective morality is
suggesting that this human creation has some features which are
independent of the specific human and common to all.
chau
Alejandro Dubrovsky
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:02:46 MST