3WD and all:
> DMB says:
> OK. If you're against the abuse and distortion of the meaning of rights,
> then I'm with you 100%.
3WD responded:
This statement should lead me to think that you're opposed to
egalitarianism, for no theory has a greater history as an abuser and
distorter of human rights, but I'm sure this is not the case.
DMB SAYS:
I'm opposed to abuse and distortion, not rights. DUH!
3WD said:
I had a big, long, point by point response created to your post but I
threw it away in lieu of these links
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~uctytho/whatequalityisnot.htm and
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~uctytho/whatequalityis.htm which covers the bases
much better than I had. The essay "What Equality is Not" ends this way:
"A third conclusion is that we cannot be said to have found a
fundamental [equality] principle of the Left, something that is both
arguable and gives unity to it. Such a thing is necessary to any final
judgement on Conservatism. Conservatives, as we have seen, speak much
nonsense about equality. They have had right on their side, however, in
declaring that at least an arguable understanding of the principle of
equality of results, the only real candidate for a fundamental
principle that has been much in evidence in the history of
egalitarianism, appears in the end to be a disaster, ......"
DMB SAYS:
"Equality of results" is nowhere near equality of rights. Your lazy attempt
is only an argument against something I never said and do not believe.
You're distorting the issue and abusing a straw man.
3WD asked:
After you have read and understand these essays possibly you might like
to tackle the question:
How is it that the MoQ which describes reality as five pluralistic
competing moral orders "an endless stream of puzzle pieces which we
think should fit together but somehow never seem to" and yet at the same
time claims that :
1. That it is possible to craft a system to assure e-quality "Equal
Quality" of social, political, and economic values for each individual?
2. Even if it is possible, what assures it would be "Good"?
DMB answers:
As to the "homework" assignment, no thanks. I hardly think its fair to ask
me to do extra work to compensate for your lazy unwillingness to compose a
response of your own. As to your questions, they're a wild distortion of the
issue and they twist basic definitions beyond recognition. Its hard to
believe that you're being intellectually honest. Or worse, I suppose that if
you're totally sincere, well... then I have serious doubts about your
abilities as a philosopher. I don't mean to be cruel, but your response is
really quite a mess. Yuk.
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 - 16:02:18 BST