Cheers for this Rigsy. An iterresting piece, sorta similar to my own stance on moral relitivsim. I cn see where he is coming from alas I can not fully agree.
Morality according to Lee is merely the individual's understanding of right or wrong actions. Accordingly then if person A says action A is immorral then to them it is, if person B declares action A as moral then certianly to their POV it is so, and if person C declars action A berift of moralyity at all, I.E. Amorral then it is so according to them. In short if a person says, this is good, bad or neither then that is their moraly system in play. Joel may claim that his actions are no lacking in morality but I do not belivethis is the case. On Aug 22, 3:50 pm, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote: > wow.... thank you for posting this Rigs... something to qusetion my own weak > uninformed stands with... that line of Socrates"Do Gods love something > because it is holy or is it holy because Gods love it".... a friend said > it.. i mean it came up in a discussion and i didnt know it was socrates;-) > ... but anyways.... about what Joel says... well actually no i cant see > ethics without morality... so i am not too sure... need to give it more > thought in the shower.... > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 7:29 PM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > By Joel Marks- plus reader comments > > >http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/21/confessions-of-an-ex-... > > -- > EverComing
