On Aug 22, 2009, at 9:49 AM, MarshaV wrote:
Hi Steve,
Do you have one universal definition of 'slavery'?
Marsha
Hi Marsha,
I could never give a universal definition of "slavery" or any word. I
think I could give a definition that we both could agree upon, but I
don't think it would be necessary to do that because I think we both
already know what slavery is. An ahistorical, transcultural, universal
definition of slavery would make no sense because slavery is a
historical cultural phenomenon. I can't imagine that "slavery" has any
existence outside language or that slavery exists outside of culture.
Can you? Likewise, "truth" as I understand it has no existence outside
of culture-dependent language either. I don't see it as referring to
some Platonic Form.
If we both share an understanding of how "slavery, "immoral," and
"true" function in language, then perhaps we can agree that it is true
that slavery is immoral. If you need some qualifier like "all things
being equal," then go ahead and add it. But unless you really are a
thorough-going relativist, I think there ought to be some way for you
to use "slavery, "immoral," and "true" in a sentence that you believe.
Best,
Steve
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/
