| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Darqcyde

Joined: 11 Jul 2006 Posts: 9085 Location: A false vacuum abiding in ignorance.
|
Posted: Tue Sep 19, 2006 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Major Tom wrote: | it depends on which ethical standard and what set of morals you are applying.
i'll say this, though -- it is definitely possible for an action to be unethical, immoral and completely legal. |
"Say what?" _________________
...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.
http://12ozlb.blogspot.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jsimpleton

Joined: 01 Sep 2006 Posts: 143 Location: maryland/dc area USA
|
Posted: Tue Sep 19, 2006 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kame wrote: | | Enjoy life, and as much as possible, don't do it at someone elses expense. |
*sits in silence soaking in the wisdom* |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jsimpleton

Joined: 01 Sep 2006 Posts: 143 Location: maryland/dc area USA
|
Posted: Tue Sep 19, 2006 11:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| we can all just be amoralist, that could be fun. hrm... but would that make us undefined? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rm

Joined: 25 Jul 2006 Posts: 4073
|
Posted: Tue Sep 19, 2006 11:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| define undefined. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jsimpleton

Joined: 01 Sep 2006 Posts: 143 Location: maryland/dc area USA
|
Posted: Tue Sep 19, 2006 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| well, we put labels on people by their actions (not always but usually). Their actions are guided by their morals/ethics. So if everyone's amoral can we still define someone when their actions are unrestricted? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rm

Joined: 25 Jul 2006 Posts: 4073
|
Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 12:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| unless they are simultaneously doing every possible action at every moment ad nauseum, then yeah, I'd say we can define them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|