Hi 3WD:
Thanks for your references:
> Couple of links to make following the Struan/Elephant dialogue possible
> for the scholastically challenged like myself.
>
> http://www.calresco.org/lucas/context.htm
> http://www.calresco.org/ethics.htm
I recommend Chris Lucas' paper on "Ethics as Emotions" to all and thank you
for recommending it. As I read it I was reminded of Richard C.
Vitzthum, champion of scientific materialism and sometimes
mentioned on this site, who wrote:
"Furthermore, the reductionist equates moral discrimination with
sense discrimination. That is, the ability to sense a difference
between head and cold, light and dark, acide and alkaline is
indistinguishable from the ability to decide whether this thing or
place or experience is better or worse than that thing, place or
experience. Physical sensing and moral judgment have from the
start been similutaneousand identical processes, and even the
most refined and abstruse moral reasoning is rooted in the slime
and grit of earth natural history. Human beings are moral to the
core, not because a deity has commanded them to be or because
they've chosen to be but because natural selection has forced
them to be."
Science is built on physical sensing. The MOQ is built on moral
judgment. Since both are identical processes, any supposed gap
between science and the MOQ is groundless. The Lucas paper
expands on this conclusion.
Thanks again.
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
