Comments on: Tsujigiri and the error of moral relativism http://www.nostate.com/745/tsujigiri-and-the-error-of-moral-relativism/ ACCESS ALL AREAS Thu, 09 Feb 2012 09:39:04 +0000 hourly 1 By: anarcho-mercantilisthttp://www.nostate.com/745/tsujigiri-and-the-error-of-moral-relativism/comment-page-1/#comment-934 anarcho-mercantilist Sat, 18 Oct 2008 16:36:01 +0000 http://www.nostate.com/?p=745#comment-934 Mike, thanks for your reply. I plan to do a new post on my blog about the fallacy of the subjectivist/objectivist semantic conflict. Mike, thanks for your reply. I plan to do a new post on my blog about the fallacy of the subjectivist/objectivist semantic conflict.

]]> By: Mike Gogulskihttp://www.nostate.com/745/tsujigiri-and-the-error-of-moral-relativism/comment-page-1/#comment-915 Mike Gogulski Sat, 18 Oct 2008 10:27:29 +0000 http://www.nostate.com/?p=745#comment-915 I did recognize Uma, Ethan. The caption was for fun, since I couldn't find the "samurai beset hapless peasant" picture I was after ;) I did recognize Uma, Ethan. The caption was for fun, since I couldn’t find the “samurai beset hapless peasant” picture I was after ;)

]]> By: Ethan Lee Vitahttp://www.nostate.com/745/tsujigiri-and-the-error-of-moral-relativism/comment-page-1/#comment-911 Ethan Lee Vita Sat, 18 Oct 2008 08:08:58 +0000 http://www.nostate.com/?p=745#comment-911 That girl is from the movies Kill Bill vol 1 and 2. I couldn't tell if you intentionally didn't write that or not. That girl is from the movies Kill Bill vol 1 and 2. I couldn’t tell if you intentionally didn’t write that or not.

]]> By: Mike Gogulskihttp://www.nostate.com/745/tsujigiri-and-the-error-of-moral-relativism/comment-page-1/#comment-901 Mike Gogulski Thu, 16 Oct 2008 13:35:21 +0000 http://www.nostate.com/?p=745#comment-901 Azrael: Your laziness comports well with mine! :) anarcho-mercantilist: I'll buy that. In my own muddled thinking the distinction between "morality" and "ethics" is often blurred, but there is a distinction nonetheless. scineram: does your amoralism lead you to the same ethical normative prescription as anarcho-mercantilist specifies above? Azrael: Your laziness comports well with mine! :)

anarcho-mercantilist: I’ll buy that. In my own muddled thinking the distinction between “morality” and “ethics” is often blurred, but there is a distinction nonetheless.

scineram: does your amoralism lead you to the same ethical normative prescription as anarcho-mercantilist specifies above?

]]> By: scineramhttp://www.nostate.com/745/tsujigiri-and-the-error-of-moral-relativism/comment-page-1/#comment-898 scineram Thu, 16 Oct 2008 13:18:07 +0000 http://www.nostate.com/?p=745#comment-898 I switched from moralism to amoralism. You should have kept the essay, it was true. I switched from moralism to amoralism. You should have kept the essay, it was true.

]]> By: anarcho-mercantilisthttp://www.nostate.com/745/tsujigiri-and-the-error-of-moral-relativism/comment-page-1/#comment-890 anarcho-mercantilist Wed, 15 Oct 2008 20:49:26 +0000 http://www.nostate.com/?p=745#comment-890 I identify myself as an ethical universalist and a moral subjectivist. Randians would probably see this as contradictory. I do not. Notice the difference between the definitions of morality and ethics. I define morality as the differing believes and behaviors of individuals. I define ethics as a code of conduct that everyone should follow. Randians define ethical subjectivism as the belief that we should allow differing ethical codes. Randians define ethical objectivism as the belief that we should encourage everyone to follow one common ethical code. Notice that Randians have a normative definition of subjectivism and objectivism, while non-Randians have a descriptive definition of subjectivism and objectivism. When I identify myself as a moral subjectivist, I do not mean that I should allow differing ethical codes. I mean in a descriptive sense that I view individuals create view morality as a mental concept. I believe that morality evolved from evolution. But in ethics, I have a normative conception that all individuals should follow an universal moral code: the non-aggression principle. I identify myself as an ethical universalist and a moral subjectivist. Randians would probably see this as contradictory. I do not. Notice the difference between the definitions of morality and ethics.

I define morality as the differing believes and behaviors of individuals. I define ethics as a code of conduct that everyone should follow.

Randians define ethical subjectivism as the belief that we should allow differing ethical codes. Randians define ethical objectivism as the belief that we should encourage everyone to follow one common ethical code.

Notice that Randians have a normative definition of subjectivism and objectivism, while non-Randians have a descriptive definition of subjectivism and objectivism. When I identify myself as a moral subjectivist, I do not mean that I should allow differing ethical codes. I mean in a descriptive sense that I view individuals create view morality as a mental concept. I believe that morality evolved from evolution.

But in ethics, I have a normative conception that all individuals should follow an universal moral code: the non-aggression principle.

]]> By: Azraelhttp://www.nostate.com/745/tsujigiri-and-the-error-of-moral-relativism/comment-page-1/#comment-889 Azrael Wed, 15 Oct 2008 20:39:27 +0000 http://www.nostate.com/?p=745#comment-889 Just keep writing that line over and over? That is my lazy answer Just keep writing that line over and over?

That is my lazy answer

]]>