This is a blog to discuss philosophy, chess, politics,
C. S. Lewis, or whatever it is that I'm in the mood to discuss.
Taner is a Leftist, and as an atheist he won't be satisfied until we have an officially atheisitc Communist Government.I just wish he had the guts to say it straight out.Jeremy Mancuso, MU at Columbia
Really, I'm with anon on this one. I'm sure there were people who thought Stalin was too far to the right.
What's ironic about Taner's moral outrage is that Taner is a moral relativist. So why does he care about the "Religious Right" or evil corporations?
I haven't read Taner's essay, but I've thought for quite a while that Obama is too far to the right. Of course, I'm a leftist, but not an atheist. Was it Citigroup that was the chief doner to both the Democratic and the Republican parties?
"What's ironic about Taner's moral outrage is that Taner is a moral relativist."Suppose he's a cultural relativist. Then, his judgment "x is right" is true iff his culture's deeply held values determine that x is right. So, his judgment that Obama acted wrongly is true iff Obama's actions were not congruent with the deeply held values of Taner's culture. If he's an individual relativist, the truth-conditions for his moral judgments refer to his deeply held values. What's ironic about that? It's ironic that he cares about his own deeply held values or the deeply held values of his culture?
What's ironic about that? It's ironic that he cares about his own deeply held values or the deeply held values of his culture?I don't know if I'd call it ironic. Pretty damn funny? Sure.
Post a Comment