Quote:
Originally Posted by Simply David
K, whilst ethical dilemmas always prove convoluted it doesn't detract from the fact that they do in fact play out like that. Eg, you should not kill another person, but its ok in self defence etc.
Your argument isn't complete. To say "if you think something is wrong don't do it, don't associate with people who do it and don't assist anyone to do it" is underpinned by thinking something is wrong.
|
I said at the top that I wasn't going to get into that issue and I'm not. Well I might after this one is dealt with. so no my argumetn isn't incomplete you are broadening its scope beyond what it was designed to achieve.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Simply David
How do we arrive at thinking something is wrong? It is not through the experience of having that wrong done against us? Eg, I've been lied to andit wasn't nice. So it is doing unto others as we would have done unto ourselves but with all the caveats and drawn out explanations that go with this basic principle.
|
You haven't answered or engaged with my argument about this particular principle so I'm not going to answer or engage with this response. You need to first deal with what I have put forward before introducing your own, potentially competing points (this is what I mean when I often say 'that is a non sequitur', proper philosophical argument has a structure part of that structure is you have to deal with what came before).
So it still stands that the principle you propose is terminally flawed.
Peace,
kowalski