Bruno Marchal wrote:
Le 30-déc.-06, à 17:07, 1Z a écrit : > > > Brent Meeker wrote: >> >> > Everything starts with assumptions. The questions is whether they >> > are correct. A lunatic could try defining 2+2=5 as valid, but >> > he will soon run into inconsistencies. That is why we reject >> > 2+2=5. Ethical rules must apply to everybody as a matter of >> > definition. >> >> But who is "everybody". > > Everybody who can reason ethically. I am not sure this fair. Would you say that ethical rules does not need to be applied to mentally disabled person who just cannot reason at all?
I would say that. In the legal context it is called "diminished responsibility" or "pleading insanity".
I guess you were meaning that ethical rules should be applied *by* those who can reason ethically, in which case I agree. Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
