- Eldor Thug 37
- |
- Noble Member
Posted by: Duck duck DEATH
Posted by: Eldor Thug 37
That is a relativistic view of ethics, whereas I am coming from a objectivist view. Relativism is a flawed ethical system because it completely contradicts itself claiming it is a good system because it is tolerant and does not claim any moral truths to be absolute while at the same time extolling the virtue of tolerance, thus claiming an absolute moral truth. Furthermore, relativism defeats itself in ethical debate yet again because it claims that all views of ethics are right therefore claiming my objectivist view of ethics is right, which as a result directly contradicts everything relativist ethics claims.I am sorry to tell you but I am not so much relativist as opportunistically amoral. I find your argument very interesting none the less; latent contradictions are a favorite of mine.
However, I must admit I may have misled you as I am not in Ethics 101 I am in NE 203: Ethics and Moral Reasoning for the Naval Leader.Funny.
On a somewhat more related note I can't see the benefits outweighing the drawbacks of removing thread titles. If you remove all the thread tittles how will people know what they are discussing. I mean I realize they will soon discover once they read what the OP has to say, but what if they don't want to waste their time reading countless threads that are irrelevant to their interests when a title could easily point them in the right direction?While titles may have their merits you cannot deny there is great risk in misleading titles.
In terms of the ethics debate I would like to stop that now because it is pretty off topic and was more like a smart-ass comment I made, although I must admit well played. However, in response to the great risk of misleading tittles I believe that may fall within the realm of forum mods and not so much an egregious error in the tittle system itself.