Well since this is supposed to be an academic list let me just say....
What the f--k?
Steve
--- Steven Bissell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Excuse me Mr. Clark, where did I say that Israeli tanks and Palestinian
> child stonethowers were moral? What the devil are you talking about?
>
> Steven Bissell
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask]
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Maynard S.
> Clark
> Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2000 11:23 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: RE: Ethics and the species question
>
>
> That makes the Israeli tanks and the Palestinian child stonethrowers
> very moral, by Steven Bissell's system.
>
> You know, I do not know ANY faulty system of ethics
> which has NOT excused its immorality as practicality.
>
> I suggest that we all read The Retreat to Committment
> by the late Dr. William Warren Bartley, III.
>
> msc
>
>
> At 04:59 PM 10/15/00 -0600, Steven Bissell wrote:
>
> OK, gotcha. As long as you acknowledge the idea that a "moral"
> system
> requires "immorality" then I agree.
>
> Steven
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Adam Gottschalk
> Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2000 4:20 PM
> Subject: Re: Ethics and the species question
>
> on 10/15/00 09:36, Steven Bissell at [log in to unmask] wrote:
>
> > Bissell here: moral vs. _amoral_ is a logical impossibility. There
> is
> only
> > "amoral" or "moral/immoral." Amoral precludes anything being moral
> *or*
> > immoral.
>
> I think you missed my idea Steven. I was aiming to use your own
> semantic
> approach just to say to me the question of whether animals can act
> immorally
> is moot. If we acknowledge that some sort of ethics is at work, of
> course we
> acknowledge the potential for immorality according to such an
> ethical
> system.
>
> My concern is the question of whether or not there is any ethical
> system
> at
> work at all in non-human animals. (Again, I venture into the tricky
> territory that such a system may well be physically determined,
> rather
> than
> handed down from a rabbi or priest.) If there is not, that is where
> the
> term
> "amoral" came to my mind. My phrase "moral vs. amoral" is perhaps
> better
> phrased: animals do know right from wrong and have some form of
> ethical
> system at work in their lives and communities (moral) vs. animals
> have
> no
> ethical system whatsoever (amoral).
>
> Adam
>
=====
"In a nutshell, he [Steve] is 100% unadulterated evil. I do not believe in a 'Satan', but this man is as close to 'the real McCoy' as they come."
--Jamey Lee West
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE.
http://im.yahoo.com/
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|