Relax, Annik. This is a whole different thread. Anyway, I would agree that 1 million dollars is not worth doing a great deal of things. I do disagree that you are not as inflexible as I think. You are either very inflexible or stubborn enough to feign inflexibility in order to continue an argument. Yes, moral absolutism is wrong. I stand by that. It is one of the least logical positions on morality. Two human rights can be at a conflict in a moral situation. A moral absolutist would find themselves in a position of cognitive dissonance if they fail to adapt to reality and continue to adhere to a an unrealistic moral construct.
As for knowing your "moral code," of course I don't know it. I doubt you even know it yourself. Such is the case with almost all of us. You can sit here and type absolutes from the safety of your desk or wherever. It is much different thing to be faced with a situation. I can't say with absolute certainty what I would do if faced with a moral dilemma that conflicted with two of my beliefs and I had to make a choice, but at least I would make that choice with some flexibility instead of doing stupid things like a condemning a man who was protecting a child because of some ridiculous absolute, I can tell you that much.
As for knowing your "moral code," of course I don't know it. I doubt you even know it yourself. Such is the case with almost all of us. You can sit here and type absolutes from the safety of your desk or wherever. It is much different thing to be faced with a situation. I can't say with absolute certainty what I would do if faced with a moral dilemma that conflicted with two of my beliefs and I had to make a choice, but at least I would make that choice with some flexibility instead of doing stupid things like a condemning a man who was protecting a child because of some ridiculous absolute, I can tell you that much.
