I will also add that Chris, in a rather flatheaded way, is pushing a question that philosophers have discussed a lot going back to Plato: Why Should I Be Moral? And there isn't an obvious answer to that if you want an answer that says, What's In It For Me? My real suspicion is that we say to Chris: you don't really believe that. And if you do, and if you act onit and get out of line, we'll crush you like a bug.
--jks
>From: kelley <kwalker2 at gte.net>
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>Subject: Survivor!
>Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 09:56:45 -0500
>
>
>>christopher susi wrote:
>>
>> or maybe challenge
>>others to think in a way they hadn't considered before.
>
>you are aware, of course, that the way *you* think on this topic in this
>discussion is the predominant way of thinking about these issues? it's
>called utilitarian individualism, the ethical philosophy at the center of
>philosophical liberalism (Locke, et al). every single USer in this
>discussion and on this list, i'll bet, has actually grown up thinking much
>like this and sometimes *still* finds it hard to drop this way of thinking.
>
>there is no equivalence here, as you presume. there are plenty of
>assumptions about the world that lefties and marxists make and should be
>challenged on. members of this list who post seem to do a pretty good job
>of holding one another's feet to the fire.
_________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.