Doug wrote:
><< Actually I'm a bit mystified by the notion that religious people have 
>no theoretical reasons for objecting to sweatshops. If you think God made 
>us all equal (I don't - I don't know if there's a god, much less what s/he 
>intended), then exploitation is morally wrong and the existence of poverty 
>amidst plenty is a sin. It's harder for us seculars to come up with 
>airtight theoretical reasons to condemn exploitation and polarization, 
>though we can try to appeal to "science" or some such.

JKS responds:

>This is a bad argument for a reason that Plato remarked on some time ago. 
>The good (or bad) is not good or bad because God so pronounces: if God 
>existed and said, destroying the lives of others for your personal profit 
>and enjoyment is morally OK, we would conclude that God had gone off his 
>rails and did not deserve our reverence. There is the story of Abraham and 
>Isaac, which represents the contrary view as presented by the Hebrews, but 
>as Kierkegaard,a  defender of the Hebew view, admitted, it makes no sense.

Actually, I think Doug was referring to the _emotional security_ (as 
opposed to the logical validity) that religious people typically have when 
making statements about ethics, e.g., condemnation of the unfairness of 
sweatshops (or of the "murderous" nature of abortion). As far as I can 
tell, one can't derive ethics from logic and empirical facts. Even if one 
could do so, it's hard to imagine using facts and logic to tell one to 
actually put those ethical principles into practice, especially given the 
costs imposed on those who go against the conventional notions of ethics 
imposed by the state and popular prejudice. Religious people often have the 
emotional security to brave those slings and arrows (though, as noted, they 
don't always do it for a good cause). Non-religious folks have this kind of 
emotional security due to upbringing, training, faith in the socialist 
tradition, etc. Either way, there seems to be an "irrational" component, an 
element of _faith_.

Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] &  http://liberalarts.lmu.edu/~jdevine

Reply via email to