(August 24, 2010 at 9:31 am)leo-rcc Wrote: Then we'd have to make an agreement one way or the other. We do that all the time. That's how we get laws we don't always agree with. Right or wrong is relative in any situation.
How would we make an agreement? What principles would we use to decide?
Quote:Who says we have to?
You implied it, when you said that something's wrong if society disagrees with it.
Quote:Well I don't hold to that position, is that bad of me then?
I'd argue that it's the most logical ethical position, if you accept the validity of ethics at all (which I think you do, judging from your posts. For instance, you think it's wrong to kill innocent humans). I'll discuss my reasons for this in greater detail with you if you like.
'We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart.' H.L. Mencken
'False religion' is the ultimate tautology.
'It is just like man's vanity and impertinence to call an animal dumb because it is dumb to his dull perceptions.' Mark Twain
'I care not much for a man's religion whose dog and cat are not the better for it.' Abraham Lincoln
'False religion' is the ultimate tautology.
'It is just like man's vanity and impertinence to call an animal dumb because it is dumb to his dull perceptions.' Mark Twain
'I care not much for a man's religion whose dog and cat are not the better for it.' Abraham Lincoln
