From: Yan King Yin (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Jan 12 2004 - 00:58:49 MST
From: John Stick <email@example.com>
>In the midst of an argument whether there is an objectively correct
>moral theory, Metaqualia proposed the maximization of positive qualia
>and the minimization of negative qualia as an answer to the debate. The
>debate has gone off in various directions since, and some of the
>subsidiary points are interesting, but his main argument commits three
>terrible philosophical howlers.
[I agree with your points, and in addition...]
I think anyone who wants to construct an objective
morality must tackle the question of evolution. Ever
since the emergence of life on earth (our understanding
of which is a bit murky) everything that went on in the
biosphere fits very well the description offered by
evolution. So how can we have an objective morality
unless it is self-same as evolution?
Even the free-market economy is similar to the
evolutionary process. It's true that a person can
start off poor and get very wealthy; but we must also
understand that statistically a lot of humans are
getting worse and worse and eventually they may end
up in starvation, diseases, etc, and fail to
proliferate. *It happens and is happening*.
Whenever we organize ourselves (as in nationalism,
racism, or corporations, etc) we're decreasing the
resources available to outsiders.
Get advanced SPAM filtering on Webmail or POP Mail ... Get Lycos Mail!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:45 MDT