On 2 Sep 2008, at 23:36, Dan M wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:brin-l- >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On >> Behalf Of Charlie Bell >> Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 3:53 PM >> To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion >> Subject: Re: Science and Ideals. >> >> >> On 03/09/2008, at 1:07 AM, Dan M wrote: >> >>>> >>>> I accept a variant of the "golden rule", I just don't accept that >>>> it's >>>> anything other than a personal and social contract. >>>> >>> >>> OK, so just to be clear, you think that no social or personal >>> contract is >>> actually better than any other. >> >> Oh for fuck's sake. Where have I EVER said THAT? > > OK, it seemed to logically follow, because I didn't expect an appeal > to > infinite regression as a response. > >> Of course some are better than others. But what actually is better >> depends on what one is trying to achieve. If we're trying to achieve >> the best outcomes in terms of personal freedoms and responsibilities, >> then some ways of living are demonstrably better than others. > > OK, we've just moved a step downwards (not in a derogatory sense, > but in, > say, the sense of an excavation) in assumptions. There is no doubt > that if > we are trying to achieve X, then we can demonstrate that some ways of > reaching X are better than others. But, different people want to > achieve > different things; different cultures had different goals. Which > desires are > good, and which are not good? What objective framework exists for > measuring > these goals? And if it exists, where does it come from? And, what > about the > variety of goals, both individual and communal, that existed in the > past and > now exist. Are any of them better than the others? If so, where's > the > yardstick for measuring them?
That would be some kind of meta-ethics? A system for comparing ethical systems? Of course there are an infinite number of self-consistent meta-ethical systems so what yardstick do you use for measuring them? That would be some kind of meta-meta-ethics? A system for comparing meta-ethical systems? Of course there are an infinite number of self consistent meta-meta-ethical systems so what yardstick do you use for measuring them? That would be some kind of meta-meta-meta ethics.... > > > Now, you can add another layer to this argument, and it may very > well be > turtles all the way down. But, that's what I've seen you do.. > Ethical > things are things that help us meet this good goal. That doesn't > sound so > bad...except it doesn't answer the question, it just moves it form > what is > ethical to what are good goals. Maybe the question is flawed? Clue Maru -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ I think a case can be made that faith is one of the world's great evils, comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to eradicate. - Richard Dawkins _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
