From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Sep 10 12:35:11 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E17837B400 for ; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 12:35:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jive.SoftHome.net (jive.SoftHome.net [66.54.152.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DE0B743E42 for ; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 12:35:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from yid@softhome.net) Received: (qmail 29350 invoked by uid 417); 10 Sep 2002 19:28:27 -0000 Received: from shunt-smtp-out-0 (HELO softhome.net) (172.16.3.12) by shunt-smtp-out-0 with SMTP; 10 Sep 2002 19:28:27 -0000 Received: from planb ([216.194.2.204]) (AUTH: LOGIN yid@softhome.net) by softhome.net with esmtp; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 13:28:26 -0600 Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 15:28:17 -0400 From: Joshua Lee To: "Neal E. Westfall" Cc: keramida@ceid.upatras.gr, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why did evolution fail? Message-Id: <20020910152817.7ceb1917.yid@softhome.net> In-Reply-To: <20020910095307.X62741-100000@Tolstoy.home.lan> References: <20020909231609.68ac5883.yid@softhome.net> <20020910095307.X62741-100000@Tolstoy.home.lan> Organization: Plan B Software Labs X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.2claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd4.7) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, 10 Sep 2002 09:55:46 -0700 (PDT) "Neal E. Westfall" wrote: > On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Joshua Lee wrote: > > On Fri, 6 Sep 2002 18:30:52 -0700 (PDT) > > "Neal E. Westfall" wrote: > > > Correction. Logic and ethics are meaningless without objective > > > standards, and objective standards are impossible without > > > appealing to something, well, *objective*. "Objective" means that > > > > No, "objective" can operate according to natural law without having > > to appeal to an external source. e.g. Kantian ethics. > > ROFL. You think Kantian ethics are objective? BTW, please explain > how you get ethics from "natural law". That's a joke, right? Kantian ethics are objective, I don't happen to like a few of the conclusions it reaches, but they are objective, without placing a diety on a pedestal of objectivity. Funny, you being a Protestant, I thought you would like Kant. What do you not like about his philosophy, which is closer to your beliefs than mine anyway? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message