Hey, Craig --
[Ham, reconstructed]
1) Morality is needed only if choice is possible.
2) Choice is possible only if there is more than one alternative.
3) Morality is needed.
4) :. There is more than one alternative.
5) If only one choice is good, there is only one alternative.
6) :. Not only one choice is good.
7) If Goodness were absolute, only one choice would be good.
8) :. Goodness is not absolute.
Unfortunately, for this argument, 5) is not true.
Not every theory is reducible to a set of logical premises, and you have
gone overboard in this attempt to discredit my value thesis. It's not based
on a logical paradigm but on common sense. Most of what you've
"reconstructed" from my statement, however, is not.
1) This premise is illogical inasmuch as morality is itself a "choice", not
a "need". We choose to be moral or immoral in our behavior, just as we
choose to be social or anti-social. The value of moral conduct is social
efficacy, and not everyone places that value above personal power or
prestige.
2) That there is more than one alternative should be self-evident.
3) Again, morality is only an expedient in social relations. It is not a
fundamental human "need".
4) The above premises are not "proof" of alternatives, so this merely
restates the obvious.
5) The word alternative presumes the choice of at least one other
possibility. I did not say that 'the good' rules out choice. I said that
"If Goodness were absolute (or fixed) it would be impossible to choose."
So you are presuming absolute goodness where I do not.
6) I don't understand this at all. What does "not only one is choice good"
mean, and how is it derived from my statement?
7) As explained in 6), above, this should read: "If Goodness were absolute,
only one choice would be POSSIBLE."
8) This is beating a dead horse. I never said goodness is absolute, nor am
I arguing that it is.
In summary, the only correct premise in this list of eight is #2. And it
doesn't need a logical syllogism because it's self-evident.
:. One would be wise to put off "reconstructing" someone else's concept
until he understands it.
Thanks for the interest.
--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/
