For moral relativists

[wtfsvi]

[ QUOTE ]
The status quo is not 'correct' because it is the status quo.

[/ QUOTE ] I think you have mistunderstood me. I haven't claimed anything of the sort.

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
In that case I better bring a gang with me who feel like I do and maybe some weapons too.

[/ QUOTE ] I can't say if that would be a better strategy for you and your gang then finding someone that likes to be buggared. I'm not really sure where you are going with this. What exactly am I suppose to be distraught about?

[foal]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
off topic reply so I don't want this to derail the thread, but why would you want to have your life and the rules you live by defined by some people who lived 200 years ago?

[/ QUOTE ] What are you talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because you were born into a society that is a certain way does not mean that it 'should' be that way, or that it is desirable.

The status quo is not 'correct' because it is the status quo.

[/ QUOTE ]
Your choices are to
A- Change your society
B- Find a society more to your liking
C- Live as a legal deviant, accepting the fact that you may face penalties if caught.
D- Live outside of society

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The status quo is not 'correct' because it is the status quo.

[/ QUOTE ] I think you have mistunderstood me. I haven't claimed anything of the sort.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a knee-jerk AC thing.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If it's voluntary, it's entirely compatible with what I'm supporting. So I'm not sure what you're getting at.

[/ QUOTE ] What if it's voluntary in the sense that you are free to join another society. However there is no guarantee that another society will let you join and there's no guarantee that a society with rules to your liking exists.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're ignoring that people are not free to join another society. If I want to switch barbers, I can do so. If I want to "join another society" I have to physically relocate (and even then, some "societies" will attempt to prevent me from doing so; even the US will claim ongoing tax obligations on those who both leave and renouce citizenship). My barber doesn't use force to maintain a territorial monopoly, and if he tried, everyone would agree that he's acting illegitimately.

A "love it or leave it" arrangement is not voluntary - unless the party issuing the ultimatum is the rightful owner of the property one must leave if he does not agree to the proposal.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Most people isn't all. You're looking at an aggregate, and ignoring the effects on individuals. If 99 people gang up and kick 1 person to death, well, this seems like "most people" are getting along, so it must be OK. Right?

[/ QUOTE ]The 99 might also decide to gang up and help the 1 person to wealth. What do you have against "People should do what they feel is right."?

[/ QUOTE ]

In that case, the 1 most likely would not object. If everyone is in agreement, I have no possible objection.

Are you trying to draw an equivelency between a situation where 99 people force one to do something and a situation where 100 people all do something willingly together?

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, yet I think that it might change the discussion away from the main point, and on to specific logical issues with the example. A vast majority of people decide what morally is right vs what is wrong based of how they feel about it regardless of consistency issues. There is always an attempt to rationalize away the consistency issues when they are brought up. However most often these attempts are nothing more than making up stories ex post facto.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. Most people haven't thought about what they support enough to even realize whether it is consistent or not.


[/ QUOTE ] If you agree with this, and you also agree that most people get along well enough in life in spite of it then you understand my point. It is a successful strategy. I will gladly address the rest of your post if you can rebut it. I will also address the rest of your post for any reason you choose.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most people isn't all. You're looking at an aggregate, and ignoring the effects on individuals. If 99 people gang up and kick 1 person to death, well, this seems like "most people" are getting along, so it must be OK. Right?

[/ QUOTE ]The 99 might also decide to gang up and help the 1 person to wealth. What do you have against "People should do what they feel is right."?

[/ QUOTE ]

Your kidding, right? I"m horny and your backside looks inviting. I could care less about what you think, what matters is what I 'feel is right' so get ready to be bent over. And depending on my particular mood/feeling I might get greater feelings of satisfaction if I hear pleading and sounds like your in pain and scared for your life. This is all fine and good with me and I feel it is right.

[/ QUOTE ] I guess if that's your moral feelings. Doesn't stop me from feeling that you are wrong and defending myself. Or putting you in involuntary custody with the help of other people who think you are wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah. Might makes right? As long as it feels good AND you can get away with it, it's OK?

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
off topic reply so I don't want this to derail the thread, but why would you want to have your life and the rules you live by defined by some people who lived 200 years ago?

[/ QUOTE ] What are you talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because you were born into a society that is a certain way does not mean that it 'should' be that way, or that it is desirable.

The status quo is not 'correct' because it is the status quo.

[/ QUOTE ]
Your choices are to
A- Change your society
B- Find a society more to your liking
C- Live as a legal deviant, accepting the fact that you may face penalties if caught.
D- Live outside of society

[/ QUOTE ]

This is nothing more than a description of the status quo. It doesn't provide any sort of normative justificaiton for that state of affairs being the status quo.

Nobody is disputing what the status quo is. If someone makes a post suggesting that, for example, pot be decriminalized, do you respond by saying "but pot is illegal!!!" ?

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Most people isn't all. You're looking at an aggregate, and ignoring the effects on individuals. If 99 people gang up and kick 1 person to death, well, this seems like "most people" are getting along, so it must be OK. Right?

[/ QUOTE ]The 99 might also decide to gang up and help the 1 person to wealth. What do you have against "People should do what they feel is right."?

[/ QUOTE ]

In that case, the 1 most likely would not object. If everyone is in agreement, I have no possible objection.

Are you trying to draw an equivelency between a situation where 99 people force one to do something and a situation where 100 people all do something willingly together?

[/ QUOTE ]I understand you have no objection if everyone is in agreement. I wasn't trying to make the two equal. Just saying that the 99 should do what the 99 think is morally correct. The ones wishes may effect the 99's or they may not. Some people consider the wishes of others in what they want to do, some don't? Those that's don't care what other people wish should do what they think they should do. You seem to be saying that people shouldn't do what they think they should do, and instead do what you think they should do. I would really love a place where everyone did what i think they should do, how can i have that?

[DougShrapnel]

[ QUOTE ]
Ah. Might makes right? As long as it feels good AND you can get away with it, it's OK?

[/ QUOTE ] That's not the case. 1 group thinks what they are doing is OK, that's why they do it. The other group doesn't think what group 1 is up to is OK. I can't see why the fact that one group might win has any bearing on who is right.