It sounds like there are the seeds of an interesting discussion in this but
I don't really care to be drawn into an ongoing feud.

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 6:43 AM, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:

> Let me try to show you by defining this Google group "Minds Eye" as our
> common reality. It comes in the form of the English language. Now the
> English language is not my native language, which qualifies me for not
> having been exposed to a prescriptive moral when it comes to violating
> innate English language principles and rules. There is no shadow in that
> area that I need to be shown to learn to embrace. Coming from a German
> background, a statement from Chris in which he doesn't reflect his role in
> this community and the impact he has had to shape the present form of it -
> only saying: I'm out of it, it doesn't matter to me, it's your community -
>  is like me here in Berlin saying: Hitler was not German, he was Austrian
> (check his birth certificate for factual evidence) therefore you Austrians
> are the root of all evil, it doesn't matter to me. Coming back to viewing
> the prescriptive power of language at work, note how Chris has established
> structures in his new/old project in which he alone controls the grammar of
> the site and the grammar of the foreign content. The grammar of a language
> is its bones with the words as the surrounding flesh - it's not the dark
> shadow that you can make disappear by hanging the lamp right above your
> head. And yet Chris has never avoided an open argument with me over what the
> world should like, which is why he will remain my American hero, and Orn and
> Molly cowards.
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 5:03 AM, Chuck Bowling <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> What is a prescriptive moral?
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 3:57 PM, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Where does that leave the prescriptive moral which I find is really under
>>> discussion here?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 9:22 PM, Chuck Bowling <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The term “morality” can be used either
>>>>
>>>>    1. descriptively to refer to some codes of conduct put forward by a
>>>>    society or,
>>>>       1. some other group, such as a religion, or
>>>>       2. accepted by an individual for her own behavior or
>>>>    2. normatively to refer to a code of conduct that, given specified
>>>>    conditions, would be put forward by all rational persons.
>>>>
>>>> The above definition of morality was taken from the Standford
>>>> Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
>>>>
>>>> It seems to me that while the interpretation of the individual may be
>>>> subjective, the overall goal of a code of conduct is to objectify 
>>>> behavioral
>>>> expectations within the group or society.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 6:14 AM, [email protected] <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In short then a flawed human is flawed only on measures of subjective
>>>>> morality.  I contend that there exists no such thing as objective
>>>>> morality.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to