From: Yan King Yin (y.k.y@lycos.com)
Date: Mon Jan 12 2004 - 00:58:49 MST
From: John Stick <johnstick@worldnet.att.net>
>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.
YKY
____________________________________________________________
Get advanced SPAM filtering on Webmail or POP Mail ... Get Lycos Mail!
http://login.mail.lycos.com/r/referral?aid=27005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:45 MDT