: I thought it was Heisenberg too, so I looked him up on the web and ended up with a lot of rocket science stuff, but nothing about the quote, so I'll go with the gorilla gambit...it was Diane Fossey!Well, the reason why I mentioned the Gorillas is because I had read something mentioned in a journal by some people who were studying primate behavior and they mentioned that it is absolutely impossible to observe anything without effecting in some way. That your vary presence will change things, however slightly.
: : There is always going to be corruption, but then, who is to what is and what is not corrupt.
: You and I. It will always be subjective, so the way to clarity is thru strength in numbers. If 1000 people say X is the rational conclusion, then they outweigh the 10 who dissent. Of course, there's that flat earth example to counter that, so it will be the eternal struggle for truth, I'm afraid. Ask Muldaur.
Well, I know that this is tantamount baiting Barry by misquoting Marx, but I am going to refer to Ayn Rand (thunderclap). Her whole basis of morality was based on the principle that something that is moral will help man to survive qua man and essentially help him to enjoy life. Thus, it is immoral to kill someone because man functions best when interacting as equals (as in society), as well as that in society we have social contracts stating that we all have the right to not be killed or harmed and thus to violate someones rights is to completely negate yours.
: :For instance, Barry considers morality to be merely human constructs that are dictated by the economic/social relations and dialectic materialism (I am getting good at the Marxspeak!) while I believe they are absolutes based upon man's nature.
: But it's all really a guess either way, isn't it? Anyway, do we really need to know from whence morality comes?
Probably not, but it sure would be comforting.
:Isn't it enough to say that we are all moral beings capable of making moral choices, and given that, it is incumbent upon us to make the right choices if possible, both independently regarding our own lives, and cooperatively regarding how we as a society wish to function?
Yes, I think everyone can agree to that. That kicker though, is that everyone has a different sense of morality.
: :His conclusion is that it is okay to have a bloody revolution and that they are exceptable measures, while my conclusion is that morality will not (should not) change over time.
: Moral relatavism -- when is it okay to bash someone's brains out? The answer is not as obvious as it first appears (I mean, believe it or not, the answer may not be, "whenever the feeling moves me."
Well, personally, I think that it should only be done as an absolute last resort in a self-defense situation. Some people may not agree with this and try to bash my brains out, I will retaliate.
None.
