Re: [Bulk] Re: Death penalty

Longest. Thread. Evar.


; )


Johne Cook
| http://raygunrevival.com | http://authorculture.blogspot.com |


On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 3:43 PM, pcg <[email protected]> wrote:

> > Sure there are. They're both doing something that may hurt an innocent
> > party. They're both doing something they know is wrong. They're both
> > breaking an implicit contract (she, with her lover; he, with society).
> > Both activities entail unpleasant consequences if they're found out.
> > Both activities can result in the relief of pent-up frustrations, at
> > the expense of something greater. Both can be justified, given the
> > proper context.<
> >
> > Oh, I thought we were talking about similarities that didn't involve
> gross moral
> > equivocation.  Silly me.
>
> The only moral equivocation here is whatever you're applying. Bruce's
> analogy was prefaced by acknowledgement that the two *weren't*
> equivalent.
>
> > And on your last one - when exactly can murder be justified?  If homicide
> were
> > justified it wouldn't be murder.
>
> I should have been more clear on this point -- the person committing
> the "sin" can justify their behavior to themselves.
>
> To your more direct point, what if I said *no* homicide is justified?
> Would that make it *all* murder? I suspect that in your mind, it would
> not, and you would prefer that I didn't impose my viewpoint upon you.
> Why, then, should I accept that any homicide is justified, simply
> because someone else says it is?
>
> >>There are as many similarities (and dissimilarities) as you care to
> > see. The purpose of an analogy is to draw attention to a *specific*
> > similarity between two situations, and illuminate that particular
> > point by casting it in a *different* light. If analogies were intended
> > to exactly reproduce the original situation, there wouldn't be any
> > point in making them.<
> >
> > So all analogies are equal?
>
> Not sure where you're getting that from.
>
> My point is that, by your apparent definition, *every* analogy would
> be flawed because every situation carries countless considerations
> which make it utterly unique, and thereby inequivalent to any other
> situation, and that's without even getting into the Rashomon effect.
>
> Me killing your mom is not the moral equivalent of you killing my cat,
> but a legitimate analogy could be drawn between the two -- not to
> demonstrate that a cat's life is worth as much as a human life, but
> that it's cruel to deprive someone of a relationship they treasure.
> Unless someone specifically says they're demonstrating a moral
> equivalent with their analogy, you're attacking... (wait for it)... a
> straw man.
>
> --
> -pcg
>  [email protected]
>
> --
> dadl-ot mailing list
> http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
> http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot
>

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot