paranoid yet?

[RobBob]

I'm only ing

[allthumbs]

[/img]

[Greg_W]

ok

 

without going into details, do slaves willfully accept their condition? no. Do they think their condition is wrong? yes. Would you think it wrong if put in their place? yes. Do slaves need to refer to moral values to declare their situation wrong? No. So why should you need to refer to morality to oppose abuse of fundamental rights? rights of the individual are not an abstract idea that one can relatively agree with or not. They are fact.

 

What is the definition of "right" and "wrong" that you are using. Where do these definitions come from? If you are using some sort of objective relativism (which it sounds like you are), from a white owner's standpoint it sounds right to me: I'm getting my fields harvested, putting some people to work, and making good money with minimal cash outlay. Plus, I get a little strange on the side every once in a while

[Jim]

Pull up the nose up buddy - the lack-of-logic light is flashing.

[Greg_W]

Jim - I have seen no logic in any of j_b's posts on this subject. My whole point is: where is he getting his definitions of "right" and "wrong"? Isn't that a valid question? In order to discuss such a topic these definitions must be agreed upon from the start. If your moral view changes based on your situation then my example has some merit.

[j_b]

What is the definition of "right" and "wrong" that you are using. Where do these definitions come from? If you are using some sort of objective relativism (which it sounds like you are), from a white owner's standpoint it sounds right to me: I'm getting my fields harvested, putting some people to work, and making good money with minimal cash outlay. Plus, I get a little strange on the side every once in a while

 

gasp ....

 

well this puts in perspective your ad hoc political philosophy. You once defended yourself (or your buddy) of being proponents of child labor but now you show yourself to be an apologist for slavery.

 

I guess we are getting somewhere ...

[MtnGoat]

"rights of the individual are not an abstract idea that one can relatively agree with or not. They are fact."

 

yet you have not shown this.

 

these "rights" are not written on an atom somewhere nor can you sit down with a person of another culture and prove these rights exist objectively like you can can prove that a circle has a fixed ratio of radius to circumference with a string and something to draw with.

 

We can decide what we believe rights are, and decide to act as if they exist, but go a nation where Sharia is implemented and you will see a completely different set of "rights" being observed, with every bit as much fervent belief and intensity as anyone here believes in our "rights".

 

So when we come to religion, slavery, and your view of my rights versus my view of my rights, we get into a pretty big problem. I choose to act as if certain rights are innate, while realizing they are not, because it provides a framework for moral judgements. If you claim rights are objective and non relative, how is it you and I have different views of them?

 

[Greg_W]

My response shows nothing of my opinion of slavery. Please get off your high fucking horse. You brought up slavery, I am taking the opposite side for the sake of debate. By the way, you haven't answered by previous question: What are the definitions of right and wrong that you use to come to the conclusion that slavery is wrong? Second, where did these definitions originate from?

[j_b]

where is he getting his definitions of "right" and "wrong"?

 

so when the schoolyard bully beat you up to steal your lunch, did you need a philosophical dictionary to decide whether it was right or wrong?

 

oh wait, perhaps you were the bully ...

[Greg_W]

Answer the fucking question, you asshole! Or can you? It seems that this is where your pathetic argument starts to unravel.

[MtnGoat]

"but now you show yourself to be an apologist for slavery."

 

I would posit you yourself lean in that direction, the more actions you are support compelling free individuals to act in service of, without their explicit and free consent, the more slavery you support.

 

 

[sk]

I think what my dear friend GregW is trying to point out is that...

 

"Nothing is so right or wrong, as thinking makes it so"

 

-William Shakespear

[Greg_W]

Well quoted, Muffy. Really I am trying to get to the basis of what and where j_b's understanding of 'right' and 'wrong' came from.

[freeclimb9]

Is it immoral to have a belay slave?

[j_b]

"but now you show yourself to be an apologist for slavery."

 

I would posit you yourself lean in that direction, the more actions you are support compelling free individuals to act in service of, without their explicit and free consent, the more slavery you support.

 

the absurdity of the argument is mind-boggling. So declaring slavery is objectively wrong ultimately amounts to being pro-slavery because it deprives the slave owner of his freedom to do as he pleases?

 

you guys are out to lunch.

[sk]

It is only Immoral if you believe it to be immoral, or someone can lead you to believe it is immoral.

 

 

[iain]

Is it immoral to have a belay slave?

 

But does the rope really even exist? Once again you dodge the question. What is the definition of "rope". Who are you to say what "rope" is when, as Heisenburg made clear, your own observation of said rope alters the very presence of the "rope". Please summarize in 300 words or less and present your sources.

[Greg_W]

Thanks for again dodging the question, j_b. Good job missing MtnGoat's point that, you, as one who feels entitled to a part of the fruits of my labor without my consent are indeed enslaving me.

 

Now, answer my questions if you can. If you can't, be a man and admit it, otherwise shut the fuck up.

[j_b]

Answer the fucking question, you asshole!

 

i did!

 

so when the schoolyard bully beat you up to steal your lunch, did you need a philosophical dictionary to decide whether it was right or wrong?

 

so did you know right away whether being beat up was right or wrong? or did you need to define it first?

[j_b]

Thanks for again dodging the question, j_b. Good job missing MtnGoat's point that, you, as one who feels entitled to a part of the fruits of my labor without my consent are indeed enslaving me.

 

so are you entitled to the labor of your slaves? hypothetically speaking ...

[sk]

I see Iain took philosophy in college as well

 

you can prove nothing

[iain]

Freeclimb answer the question dammit I know you're online. Or be a man about it and admit you have no answer.

[freeclimb9]

Who are you to say what "rope" is when, as Heisenburg made clear, your own observation of said rope alters the very presence of the "rope".

First off, "It depends on what the meaning of the word is, is."

Secondly, Planck's constant is sufficiently small that Newtonian mechanics suffice in describing the world of the belay slave's existence.

[Greg_W]

You did? I must have missed it; please enlighten me.

 

I know the basis for what I believe to be right and wrong. It seems that we disagree, so I am asking where your belief is right and wrong is based. Get it?

[Greg_W]

Dude, the belay slave likes it. Doesn't she?