dionisio

drivin u bananas :lol:

hey laura :D

:stunned: toma

:cool:

:blank:

:) :(

:stunned:

:lol:

:/

:stunned: @av

:o

mota :stunned:

top :stunned:

:snore:

:lol:

:stunned: :confused:

Fair enough. A couple of things: 1) I think we're getting a little stuck on the term "moral." That's the textbook definition which justifies Eric's usage of the word gay, but it wasn't really Eric's intent. Eric's intent was probably more to use the word gay as a synonym for lame. This isn't pertinent to the large philosophical issue we've been discussing, but it's important in understanding this situation. Point #2 will address the nature of morality, the hypothetical being Eric intended to refer to Carla's morality. I don't feel he did. 2) Your point, as I'm understanding it, is that if a person does not have morals then that person can not question another's morals. What if they have a full knowledge of morals? Would they tend me able to question another's application of them. Morals are nothing but a set of abilities; morality being the application there of. How I choose to exercise my morals constitutes my morality. Whether somebody acts in a moral or immoral fashion is an assessment of one's morality or actions: Do you exercise your ability to be a moral person. Of course, intertwined with this is our consolidated view of what actions are moral or immoral, a view which I won't explain here. With that in mind, do we say that Eric has no concept of morals and therefore is criticizing Carla from a position of ignorance (and is thus ill equiped to form a valid inquiry) or do we say that he is merely chosing not to exhibit morality? I contend that the latter is the case, for most of the time Eric is a fine poster but in an attempt to illicit a response sometimes deviates from behaivours that would be considered moral. If you agree with this, then Eric would be equiped to judge another's morality, having morals just chosing to exercise them less frequently than we wuld like. If you disgaree with this and feel Eric lacks knowledge of morals, does not possess the ability to determine right from wrong, then you should conclude that he is not equipped to offer a valid criticism of Carla. But to that point I would offer that if Eric did lack knowledge of morals his irratic behaviour would be seen mroe regularly than they are: in situations where he's not trying to illicit responses but, rather, offering immoral responses as a default behavior. And while there are times when Eric might cross the line, I don't see those times occurring with such frequency as to show a complete lack of knowledge of morals. And that appears to be the crux of this argument: Whether you feel Eric possesses this knowledge. So if Eric choses "not to exhibit morality" in some situations, who gives him the right not to tolerate another poster's same attitude, IF he believes that this is the case (as I said I do not feel Carla lacks moral standards). The only thing which surprised me and therefore started this discussion was the fact you said you thought he'd be referrin to her lack of ethics. I did understand his "gay" as sth similar to "lame" but did question your use of morality in this situation, especially after his comment in another thread which as you might have noticed by now really pissed me off. To me someone not having any morals can not have a full knowledge of morals, so therefore I don't think its possible for this person to question another's application of them. Morals to me are accepted standards, good or right, judged by the standards of an average person or society at large. So therefore I believe that if you do know about moral principles, you automatically adapt to them and show accordingly in society.I don't want to go on further questioning whether Eric possesses knowledge of moral standards especially because I do not feel to have the right to judge such characteristic, but as I said even if the comment is not directed at me I feel personally in some way offended by it cause it shatters my view of interpersonal behaviour on this board. I feel I have tried to make my points clear and knowing I have more important things to do I will not comment any further on this topic, thank you for taking your time trying explaining me.

:stunned:

:lol: a band

sam sim :stunned:

:D

not MOTA!u keep on eatin choc MOTU!!! :lol: :lol:

:kiss:

:huh: i meant denise coz she added me to her ignore list :rolleyes:

:rolleyes: :kiss: