See below. On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 9:00 PM, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]>wrote:
> are you familiar with critical realism .. the only tenable form of realism > I think .. worth investigating ... > No - will check out. > > my opinion is that a focus on the commonality of values around concrete > objectives is a sufficient condition for joint approaches, independently of > the full metaphysics of the persons involved .. > Sure... I was just trying to provide some rationale for my motivation. > > I would also like to choose to see moral realism and moral relativism as > polarities ... it's not difficult to see widely contradictory moral values > and opinions (gay marriage comes to mind as an example, or honour killings, > in some countries it's morally acceptable to attack unfaithful women with > acid, in thailand it's morally acceptable for females to cut male genitalia > of unfaithful husbands), while it is also possible to come to certain moral > agreements across cultures and civilisations; holding on to both the > universal and particular, to the common and to the individual, seems to be > the challenge. > This is what I am challenging. I am saying that some actions are right and others are wrong (period) and the basis for this distinction rests on scientific methodology which, as far as I am concerned, is the only rational paradigm of truth. Of course others, religious zealots of all flavoursm for example, will have other paradigms of truth. The basis for what is right/wrong will be related to survival (species, individual...). This is also why not dealing with climate change drives me crazy... I think it's morally wrong. I am not claiming that science has advanced to the point where we know what these right actions are, however. My claim is that it is possible. > On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Suresh Fernando < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Hey Folks, >> >> In case you need some bed time reading ;-) >> >> When I say that I believe that we can make this world a better place, and >> that we should be sufficiently motivated to do so, I say this because I am >> what would be termed a moral >> realist.<http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-realism/>This is to say >> that I am of the opinion that there are certain actions that >> are *objectively *right and hence that we ought to do them. What those >> are exactly is another story ;-). This view is to be contrasted with moral >> relativism <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-relativism/>. >> >> The sense in which we can come to know that certain actions are *right*is a >> position grounded in a transcendentally >> idealistic <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendental_idealism> view on >> the structure of knowledge that contrasts with a scientifically realistic >> <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-realism/>perspective, and >> is outlined in a paper that I wrote entitled The Visibility of Moral >> Facts <http://docs.google.com/View?id=dc4gbgsj_208cg9z5qc5>. >> >> I also believe that right action is intrinsically tied to the relationship >> between our reflexive (self conscious) nature and our *survival within >> communities*. I advance an argument to this effect in a paper entitled The >> Structure of Identity.<http://docs.google.com/View?id=dc4gbgsj_900fjd2xmcz> >> >> Hence, for me, there are certain things as rational thinking beings that >> we ought to do (even if we don't as a species know what they are) and there >> is a connection between what they are and community. >> >> If you can make the connection between community and collaboration, you >> can get a better idea for why developing collaborative frameworks and >> processes is vitally important for me. >> >> >> Unfortunately, my musings tell me nothing about what those right actions >> actually are... ;-) >> >> -- >> Suresh Fernando >> WEBSITE: http://radical-inclusion.com >> WEBSITE: http://wiki.openkollab.com >> BLOG: http://sureshfernando.wordpress.com >> TWITTER: http://twitter.com/sureshf >> FACEBOOK: facebook.com/suresh.fernando >> 604-889-8167 >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Media Ecology Workshop '09" group. >> To post to this group, send email to >> [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]<media-ecology-workshop-09%[email protected]> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/media-ecology-workshop-09?hl=en. >> >> > > > -- > Work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University - Think > thank: http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI > > P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net > > Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: > http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org > > Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; > http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens > > > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Media Ecology Workshop '09" group. > To post to this group, send email to > [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<media-ecology-workshop-09%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/media-ecology-workshop-09?hl=en. > > -- Suresh Fernando WEBSITE: http://radical-inclusion.com WEBSITE: http://wiki.openkollab.com BLOG: http://sureshfernando.wordpress.com TWITTER: http://twitter.com/sureshf FACEBOOK: facebook.com/suresh.fernando 604-889-8167--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CooperationCommons" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected].
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cooperationcommons?hl=en.
