Hi all,
just a quick note, initially I did not want to partcipate because I simply
can't see the problem. If Struan is really eager to participate there are
ways enough on the net, everybody knows that so I think he is just provoking
because he did know how the group was going to react. On ad hominem attacks,
I do not think they are immorral per se, because the posts that come in here
reflect characters, I agree in saying that someone is wrong because he is an
asshole does not contribute to the quality of the discussion. But say I want
to critizise Kant his categorical imperative or his whole philosophy, it is
in my opinion very moral to attack him(or use) his character. The illusion
of the imperative is a consequence of his personal character and religion(my
opinion). Pietism shines through in the categorical imperative doesn't it?
It is actually a very good way of comprehending Kant, get to Kant know
himself first. When revealing connections between philosophies and
characters(I say what's the difference?) the skie often clears up, for me
that is. But as I said when launching ad hominem attacks make sure they make
some sense.
greetz Davor
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:11 BST