By the way, using the Holocaust as an example rigs things, because it is the only example I can think of of an event/action that is morally condemned by virtually everybody. Even Holocaust deniers think that the Holocaust, if it occured, was bad. Using any other example (beliefs about abortion, imperialism, various religious claims, anything really) will illustrate effectively how tenuous the Heartfieldian position is.
----- Original Message ---- From: Matthias Wasser <matthias.wasser at gmail.com>
When people deny that it is a fact that the Holocaust was wrong, they do not mean to disavow their disapproval of the Holocaust. Rather, they deny that their disapproval of the Holocaust describes the noumenal Holocaust as such, as opposed to their own mental (and hopefully practical) attitude towards it.
People engage in approval and disapproval, and actions based on the same, all the time without averring an objective basis to it. I prefer vanilla ice cream to chocolate, so given a choice, I order the latter. My feelings about genocide are much stronger: while I lack access to the counterfactual knowledge to say so, the idea that I would risk my life to hide Jews in the attic or whatever comforts me, and I am full of admiration for those who did. Psychology suggests that the motivational influence of ethical beliefs looms disappointingly small, but I'm unaware of any evidence of the influence of metaethical beliefs whatsoever. ___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk