Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > Peter, > > We can discuss any subject rationally if we agree on axioms, but the problem > is that > in matters of value, those axioms are ultimately arbitrary.
So you say. I don't agree. > I believe that capital > punishment is wrong; not because it is not a good deterrent, or because it is > irreversible > if a mistake is made, but just because it's bad, evil. You refusal to rationalise moral issues does not show that it is impossible for others to. > Other people do not agree with me. > I can't convince them, they can't convince me, because we disagree on an > axiom. It is possible to have meta-arguments about axioms. > If > someone could show me that violent crime has consistently decreased in places > where > capital punishment has been introduced, and further demonstrated a causative > link, then > I might have to concede that I was wrong about my facts, but I would not > change my mind > about capital punishment being wrong, because in the *final* analysis every > ethical and > aesthetic belief has no logical or empirical justification. Or because you have reasons, objective ones,. that override the pragmatic consideration.. > Stathis Papaioannou --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
