Hi Craig --


> By "an exception to the Golden Rule" I would not mean someone
> who DOES not follow the Golden Rule.  God knows, we have
> unfortunately billions of those.  I would mean someone who
> SHOULD NOT follow the Golden Rule.

It seems to me that a universal rule is meaningless if it does not apply to 
everyone.

However, I don't view the Golden Rule or Kant's Categorical Imperative as 
"rules" but as guidelines to which one's moral values generally subscribe. 
In a truly authentic society, there would be no need for either rules or 
guidelines.  An individual would have everyone else's well-being at heart. 
While you may regard that idea as a utopian pipe-dream, it is certainly 
within man's capacity to value human life and respect the rational 
self-interest of every individual.

If we are sufficiently intelligent to establish laws based on principles of 
rational behavior, surely we can see the value of a harmonious society of 
free individuals.  Why not aim for a valuistic philosophy that can achieve 
this without the canonic laws and obeisance to authority that have stifled 
man's innate value sensibility for 6000 years?

A little over two centuries ago, a group of inspired men successfully 
founded a free nation governed by the consent of its people.  Despite some 
problems along the way, it became the most powerful and most envied nation 
on earth.  You folks put a lot of emphasis on the evolution of society.  Is 
it not at least conceivable that, given the right kind of economic and moral 
support, by the end of the 21st century most of the Third World nations 
might decide to follow our example?

Regards,
Ham

Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Reply via email to