Quote:
Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
That one is not hard to defend at all. I think that I understand the point and agree with it completely.
See my post above. If you want further explanation, I'll discuss it.
I think part of the problem might be that you use/understand/mean the terms "moral" and "immoral" differently than he does.
S_A_M
|
You may be right. The key is the definition of moral. And it is pretty important to have an agreed upon definition of moral if you are going to be discussing if something is right, or wrong, just, or unjust.
Did you see my comments about an immoral imperative? I see that as an oxymoron. If you should do something to serve justice, in my understanding of the terminology that means it has to be moral.
How do you see it?
If the act of torturing the terrorist to save the innocent people is immoral but you should do it, does that mean it is immoral but just? Immoral but the right thing to do?
How does moral differ from Just and Right (as in acting in the right and not in the wrong)?
If the act of torturing the terrorist is not right, unjust and immoral, then how do you differentiate that act, which you should do, from torturing an innocent child for fun, which you should definitely not do? What makes one something you should do and the other something you shouldn't do?
I don't know how to say this without sounding presumptuous or pretentious, but Taxwonk I would also be interested in hearing what you have to say about this.
