From: Randall Randall (randall@randallsquared.com)
Date: Fri Jul 02 2004 - 21:41:42 MDT
On Jul 2, 2004, at 11:23 PM, Metaqualia wrote:
>> Whether feelings are inherently (i.e. aside from being physical
>> processes)
>> relevant for an arbitrary morality depends on the morality.
>
> no because in the dictionary definition you quoted the ideas of right
> and
> wrong are referenced, and right and wrong refer to good and evil,
> which in
> the end only have meaning if qualia exist.
Um, that's just a restatement of your position.
Do you have some argument for why right and wrong
can't be based on something other than one's feelings
about it?
-- Randall Randall <randall@randallsquared.com> Property law should use #'EQ , not #'EQUAL .
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 21 2006 - 04:22:42 MST