<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2668" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT size=4>All,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Melynda has pointed out by example what many on this list
probably already know.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Anyone who has taken an general ethics course taught by the
philosophy department in any secular university knows that there are many
different ethical systems.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Each of these systems has its own general basis for
justifying its ethical proscriptions. The ethical proscriptions
from one system frequently are inconsistent with those of other
systems. Some systems have insurmountable problems because of clear
logical inconsistency. Some systems are based entirely on what, in effect,
is superstition and ignorance. Some are based, in part, on knowledge
acquired through the application of observation and logic.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>There is no accepted way known currently that allows
tests/verification/etc to determine which ethical system is the "true
one". The fundamental axioms (fundamental "oughts") of ethical systems
have yet to be proven, although in particular cultures those axioms can have
assignable probabilities. Hence at present, many ethical systems are
thus heuristically based. There is no (or very little controversy) about
what the gravitational constant in Moscow, Idaho is. There is a great deal
of irresolvable controversy about the application of the death penalty with no
accepted method to determine the correct answer.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>This status does not mean that we should not stop
observing, testing, theorizing, etc. What it does mean is that we ought be
careful when spending public money promoting a particular ethical system, and
especially if its basis is superstition and ignorance, rather than making
predominantly testable/verifiable claims.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><BR>Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)<BR><A
href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">deco@moscow.com</A><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>----- Original Message ----- </FONT>
<DIV><FONT size=4>From: "Melynda Huskey" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:melyndahuskey@earthlink.net"><FONT
size=4>melyndahuskey@earthlink.net</FONT></A><FONT size=4>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>To: "lfalen" <</FONT><A
href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com"><FONT
size=4>lfalen@turbonet.com</FONT></A><FONT size=4>>; <</FONT><A
href="mailto:mushroom@moscow.com"><FONT
size=4>mushroom@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT size=4>>; <</FONT><A
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT
size=4>vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><FONT size=4>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Sent: Friday, June 24, 2005 1:09 PM</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] virtues come
first</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><BR></FONT></DIV><FONT size=4>>L Falen writes:<BR>>
<BR>> "A good place to start is Aesopes Fables."<BR>> <BR>> Here are
four fables from Laura Gibbs' 2002 translation of Aesop, </FONT><A
href="http://www.mythfolklore.net/aesopica/index.htm"><FONT
size=4>http://www.mythfolklore.net/aesopica/index.htm</FONT></A><BR><FONT
size=4>> which suggest that finding common values might be just a little
trickier than one might initially think:<BR>> <BR>> "The Galli, those
priests of the goddess Cybebe, used a donkey to carry their luggage when they
went around begging for alms. When their donkey finally died, overcome by work
and the whip, they stripped his hide and made themselves some tambourines. When
someone asked them what they had done with their darling donkey, the priests
replied, 'He thought that once he died he would get some rest, but he keeps on
getting beaten just the same!' It is not enough that a man who is born
under an unlucky star leads an unhappy life: the bitter affliction of his fate
pursues him even after he is dead.<BR>> <BR>> "There was a hooligan who
struck Aesop with a stone. Aesop said, 'Well done!' and he even gave the boy a
coin. Then he added, 'Confound it, that's all the cash I've got, but I'll show
you more where that came from. Look, the man coming this way is a wealthy and
important person; if you can hit him with a stone the same way you hit me,
you'll get the reward you deserve.' The hooligan was convinced and did as Aesop
told him, but his hope for a reward brought his reckless daring to ruin: he was
arrested and paid the price for his crime on the cross. <BR>> <BR>> "A man
caught a jackdaw and tied the bird's foot with a piece of string so that he
could give the bird to his children as a present. The jackdaw, however, could
not stand to live in human society, so when they let him loose for just a
moment, he ran away. But when he got back to his nest, the string became
entangled in the branches, so that the jackdaw was unable to fly. As he was
dying, the bird said to himself, 'How stupid of me! Since I could not stand
being a slave in human society, I have brought about my own death.'<BR>>
<BR>> Values--and virtues--are not universal. Common sense is
culturally defined. A very simple abstraction, such as "Everybody should
be honest," quickly founders under the pressures of defining honesty in specific
cases. Moreover, as we can surely admit to ourselves, if not to the world
at large, a strong working definition of honesty doesn't always translate into
honest behavior. <BR>> <BR>> Melynda Huskey<BR>> <BR>>
_____________________________________________________<BR>> List services
made available by First Step Internet, <BR>> serving the communities of
the Palouse since 1994.
<BR>>
</FONT><A href="http://www.fsr.net"><FONT
size=4>http://www.fsr.net</FONT></A><FONT
size=4>
<BR>> </FONT><A
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"><FONT
size=4>mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</FONT></A><BR><FONT size=4>>
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ<BR>>
<BR>></FONT></BODY></HTML>