»
Discussion
»
Philosophy 101
»
The Relativity of Morality
| Philosophy 101 |
|
The Relativity of Morality |
|
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan 
|
. "IRANIAN MILITIAS MARRY, RAPE VIRGIN PRISONERS BEFORE EXECUTIONS" http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,534116,00.html If I remember my “ I Claudius” correctly the Romans did the same thing so who are we, the West, to judge? . |
||
| © Copyright 2009 John Pawlik - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
I am not sure whither you are going with this, John. We aren't exactly Romans. But even if we were, and some Romans did that, it wouldn't make it right to generalize all Romans as doing or believing in such things. It especially wouldn't make such things worthy of moral acceptance. |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. This is taking off on something noted in Allan Bloom’s Closing of the American Mind. Below, (though I think it a bit of a rant), is a lecture that summarizes some of Bloom’s complaints: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c . |
||
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Interesting vid. I shouldn't be surprised by now, but it still never ceases to amaze me how everything in the US is bigger, better, larger and louder, than elsewhere - including the extremes. Here we have the extreme right wing elite ranting about the extreme left wing elite. Not a shred of rationality or commonsense in either viewpoint. Fortunately most times they tend to cancel each other and leave relatively sane people in charge. God help us if any of these nutters, from either wing, ever get their hands on real power. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Can you please say directly what this discussion is trying to address? |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
Hi Ess Given Huan's usually right wing slanted views I was thinking that the initial post was a somewhat tongue in cheek proposition. The idea is, I assume, that Huan has seized upon one of the apparently more outrageous "crimes" of the Muslim world (although we only have a second hand news source from a dubious single witness) and is holding it up, also kindly proffering a clue as to how it might be defended, in the hope that one or more "liberals" on this site will take the bait and try to argue that morality is flexible and relative. It follows on from the contention in the video that "modern liberals" are evil, immoral, people determined to work their wickedness against the bastion of rightness that is Republican America, on the basis that belief in nothing will eventually, at some unspecified date, bring utopia. Huan is giving modern liberals the chance here to demonstrate their unprincipled immorality by accepting the idea that they are absolved from the duty of interference in such a heinous crime because of the crimes of their predecessors a few hundreds of years ago in Italy. Personally I think we are in the realms of Wonderland, but never mind  . |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. That there is no right or wrong. That any attempt at distinction is itself corrupt. Allan Bloom used the example of the British ending the practice of suttee in India to his students and got equivocation or a simple "The British shouldn’t have been there in the first place" as reponse. (As I said I thought the vid was in part a rant. He openly admits his liberal origins. I think he found conversion once he found Israel in the crosshairs). . |
||
|
moonbeam
since 2005-12-24
Posts 2356 |
You're talking partly about the chain of responsibility. How far is a harmful act excused by a preceding and opposite harmful act. A whole complex discussion. Yes it was a bit of a rant, an interesting one though. And yes his partisanship in relation to Isreal came over loud and clear. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Huan Yi, I am against torture and the death penalty both, no matter who uses them. If Iranians are doing this, they should be placed on trial for war crimes. Please don't be sarcastic with me about this. As I recall, you are in favor, and have used the word torture as though it was something else when applied by our own forces to people essentially picked up off the street in Iraq. I don't think anybody should torture other people, you seem to believe that we should have the right to do so and that the Iranian's shouldn't. If we are torturing people, by the way, or shipping them off to have other people torture them, and if we are imposing extra-judicial death sentences on people, then the people accused should also be charged with war crimes. I wait patiently to hear your morally consistent response to this suggestion. Surely there is a tribunal with the wisdom to try both sorts of violations with honesty that is independent of the governments of either nation, so that a just result may be rendered? Talk to me again about who's the guy whose got the issue with moral relativity here. Also tell me some more about the sourcing for your article and what additional reports you have to back it up. While it may be true, I confess this is the only report I've seen about it — Fox News via the Jerusalem Post from two unnamed and apparently unsupported sources. It certainly could be true, but I'd feel better if I knew more about it. Is there more to be heard on this matter that you'd care to share? Sincerely, Bob Kaven |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. Bob, "As I recall, you are in favor, and have used the word torture as though it was something else when applied by our own forces to people essentially picked up off the street in Iraq. " Please post the address of my comment on PIP that led you to this. John . |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear John, (1) quote: (2) quote: The explanation for the why of torture being used — "harsh treatment" is the phrase substituted in this case — amounts to an appologia for the practice, at least to my eye. It is certainly, insofar as I understand it, in conflict with US military doctrine, both as articulated by Colin Powell and by others in the past as well as by the then written documents. If I am wrong about the documents, then it is only by a short amount of time. I welcome correction in this matter, however, if I misunderstand things here. (4) I find the following reference fairly clear because this is the point of the discussion of the thread; and you return to the issue time and again. Your habit is never to quite say anything directly, but the other people on the thread are clear about your position, say back to you what they believe you to be saying to them, and you never take the chance to correct them if they are in fact wrong. quote: Having put upwards of an hour into researching this, I think this is probably enough. If you want me to dig further, I will, but I’d rather not. We may differ about the rightness of what President Truman did or any number of other things, but I know you are a man of honor and sincerity and that your differences are honest. I simply believe there is no reason to torture people, though I have certainly felt the urge to do so from time to time, and all the reasons for doing so make all too much sense to me. Sincerely, Bob Kaven |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. Yes Bob Keep digging I want that address to my PIP comment that supports your very explicit: "As I recall, you are in favor, and have used the word torture as though it was something else when applied by our own forces to people essentially picked up off the street in Iraq. " John PS: Who is Aenimal? Are you confusing me with him or her? . |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
/pip/Forum6/HTML/001836.html#000031 I excerpt from your Quote from The National Review which compromises the entire posting. As I read it, it is, in fact, the point of the entire quote and the entire posting as well. The post is # 31. quote: [This message has been edited by Bob K (07-23-2009 07:17 PM).] |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
This message is brought to you courtesy of the English Workshop: quote: Be careful about the grammar of "who". Whenever "be" is involved (or implied) it should be who not whom |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Aenimal is a member that used to post here fairly often. But he left for some reason. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Thank you, Essorant. The correction is noted. A revision of the text in the interest of brevity has made it unnecessary. Your efforts are very much appreciated, however. Sincerely, Bob Kaven |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. OK Bob So how does anything you've posted support: As I recall, you are in favor, and have used the word torture as though it was something else when applied by our own forces to people essentially picked up off the street in Iraq. " ? John . |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear John, Asked and answered. Once one actually believes that "torture" can ever be "adult" foreign policy and is willing to say so. The CIA and the military have been carrying out that "adult" foreign policy since the invasion. "Torture" included. I use "torture" in quotes because right wing sources so often do, as though "torture" were different from torture. As the article you quote from The National Review Does. As if it were irresponsible to call the thing by its name; as if "adults' don't do that. That was part of the "adult" behavior you signed on for, John. It's the grown up thing to do. Or at least to speak out clearly and consistently against it. Where would that be, John? Bob |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
Bob, You have done nothing of the kind. You made a very specific comment about me: "As I recall, you are in favor, and have used the word torture as though it was something else when applied by our own forces to people essentially picked up off the street in Iraq. " I asked you to show me the address where I wrote as would lead one to state expressly: " and have used the word torture as though it was something else when applied by our own forces to people essentially picked up off the street in Iraq. " And you have not done that repeatedly. John |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Sorry, John, Once you use The National Review to express your opinion, and the quote approves of torture as an expression of national policy, I feel my job is done. You've used them to do your work for you. If you'd wished to show disapproval of any part of that statement, you could have. If you'd wanted to qualify any part you could have. If you'd wanted to make it any clearer, it would have been difficult. From the article in The National Review quoted earlier, from which you extracted the Clinton Quote: quote: Your source approves of torture by us. I believe that this is your point of view: That we have a right to act as we did act in falsely imprisoning and then torturing folks who were gathered by highly dubious means in Iraq and Afghanistan. I think that you don’t believe that this is in fact false imprisonment, that we have some sort of right to do so. I have shown above some of my reasons for believing this. If in fact these are not your beliefs, say so, and I will admit to being wrong on the spot. And I will say I’m sorry for the misunderstanding. I have no desire to mischaracterize you. The position is a legitimate one; books have been written advancing it. I simply don’t agree with it. I asked you a question that has remained unanswered as a result the current contratemps. I asked how one might reconcile the belief that we have a right to torture others while other people did not. I initially asked this because I thought you believed we have a right to torture others for information. If you do not believe this yourself, you certainly quote people who believe we have this right. I believe it undermines our entire humanitarian case for going into Iraq. The WMD case evaporated a long time ago. I know that you have expressed discomfort with some other cases of torture, though when people that you regard as Liberal spoke out against the torture of a particularly noisome piece of murdering and child molesting human trash, you appeared to think that this was “sick.” I disagree. And I'd like to know your thinking. Bob |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. And how does anything on National Review apply "to people essentially picked up off the street in Iraq. " ? . |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
You quote a source and don't expect people to read it? 1) to see if you have it right; and 2) to see if the context is appropriate; and, 3) to check out what you base your thinking upon? That's why sources are listed. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
quote: If you feel I should say I'm sorry, I will. Should I? |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. "If in fact these are not your beliefs, say so, and I will admit to being wrong on the spot." Of course they're not my beliefs anymore than they were my practice in my war. . |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Then I am sorry. I did misunderstand you. Thank you for clearing it up. At no time did I think it was your practice. Your pardon is, of course, your affair, though I am chastened to need to request it. Which I do, Sincerely yours, Bob Kaven |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. Bob, There was a misunderstanding . . . I accept your appreciation of that. John . |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
