From: Vincent Campbell (VCampbell@dmu.ac.uk)
Date: Thu 08 May 2003 - 10:01:58 GMT
<Yes, let's presume that. Now, try again.>
But my point is, as I stated, there's absolutely no reason to
presume that, except for placing a non-violent person in a situation that
excoriates them for their non-violence. That ain't fair. Personally
speaking and aside from any distinct moral position I'm not sure I could
pull the trigger. I am not a violent or aggressive person, so killing
someone in that manner would not come easy to me, and as an act of ruthless
rationality I think it would be beyond me. It's not simply a question of
whether or not it would be justified or not, it's a question of the personal
disposition of each individual impacting on the ability to kill. How else
can I put it... since, presumably you'd have no hesitation in doing, I would
rather that you were the one with the gun- as long as you didn't then point
it at me :-) !
Are we really talking here about the limits of morality, or perhaps
the nature of morality? i.e. morality as memes, or morality as innate, etc.
etc.
Vincent
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu 08 May 2003 - 10:15:30 GMT