<html><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div>I won't comment on the death penalty, Art, BUT the argument about ethics below is a BAD argument. </div><div><br></div><div>First, the view that knowledge is possible only through empirical test is itself a philosophical view. Thus, it should be just as unprovable as you claim ethical principles to be. The view is self-refuting.</div><div><br></div><div>Second, some ethical principles are just as knowable as empirical claims. I am as certain that slavery is wrong as I am that my hand exists. Certainly people might dispute that slavery is wrong but it can't follow from that that "slavery is wrong" is unknowable. It is a consequence of the Duheim-Quine thesis that ANY evidence can be rejected if one is willing to accept the consequences and revise enough of their beliefs. If you think that dispute means lack of knowledge it is easy to show that no one knows anything.</div><div><br></div><div>Third, and related to the above, you can't give a non-question begging proof of the existence of anything, even your hand. What you can do is show that our actions convey that we all believe it (given it is true). But the same can be shown about ethical claims. Or so I think. </div><div><br></div><div>Obviously this is controversial but the point is that your argument asumes all knowledge is gained by empirical proof. But this won't even work for your belief that you have a hand. Once you show me why it is that you are entitled to believe that you have a hand, I'm pretty confident I can duplicate the story for at least one moral claim. Again, if you push the view you are holding, skepticism follows. But then ethical principles are no longer unique.</div><div><br></div><div>Lastly, often what seems to be an ethical disagreement is really something else, say, a metaphysical dispute. Take the abortion issue. Both sides AGREE that it is wrong to kill innocent persons. They disagree about the metaphysical issue, e.g., what is a person? (This is a simplification but hopefully you get the point.) </div><div><br></div><div>Now it might turn out that metaphysically issues are irresolveable and, for that reason there will always be disagreement about abortion. But you should be careful about drawing similar conclusions about ethics.</div><div><br></div><div>Dispute is part of the human condition. It is more common in philosophy and ethics but it exists even in math (think about Euclidean vs. non-Euclidean geometry). Absolutely NO broad conclusions about the impossibility of resolution can be drawn from this fact. So please keep talking about ethics! </div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.226562); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.226562);"><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.296875); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); ">Best, Joe</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.296875); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); "> </span><br>On Mar 15, 2010, at 11:22 PM, "Art Deco" <<a href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">deco@moscow.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
<div>Here's why arguments like we are engaged in cannot be resolved given our
current state of knowledge:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Ethical principles are not completely amenable to resolution by evidence or
testing. If they were, we wouldn't have such a wide diversity of opinion
on ethical matters held by decent, reasonable people. It's not like
establishing Ohm's law or the Theory of Conditioned Reflexes. Facts count,
but even when people agree on the facts, they may not agree on an underlying
ethical principle.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>It appears you are arguing for the principle that capital is never
justified, or equivalently there is not a single case where capital punishment
is justified.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>How would you empirically establish the truth of such a broad
statement? What observations would render the probability of such a
statement being 1.00?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The best we can do in our current state of knowledge (the absence of an
agreed method to establish ethical principles without doubt) is to attempt
to persuade others by citing facts or other ethical principles which they may
agree upon.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>In order to refute the statement "There is not a single case where capital
punishment is justified." only a single case need be shown.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I offered Joseph E. Duncan III as a counter-example (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_E._Duncan_III"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_E._Duncan_III">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_E._Duncan_III</a></a>)</div>
<div> </div>
<div><strong>"Joseph Edward Duncan</strong> (born February 25, 1963) is an
American convicted <a title="Serial killer" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_killer">serial killer</a> and <a title="Sex offender" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_offender">sex
offender</a> who received national attention after being arrested in connection
with the <a title="Kidnapping" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kidnapping">kidnapping</a> of Shasta
Groene,<sup id="cite_ref-0" class="reference"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_E._Duncan_III#cite_note-0"><span>[</span>1<span>]</span></a></sup>
aged 8, and her brother Dylan,<sup id="cite_ref-1" class="reference"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_E._Duncan_III#cite_note-1"><span>[</span>2<span>]</span></a></sup>
9, and being featured on <i><a title="America's Most Wanted" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America%27s_Most_Wanted">America's Most
Wanted</a></i>.<sup id="cite_ref-2" class="reference"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_E._Duncan_III#cite_note-2"><span>[</span>3<span>]</span></a></sup>
He pled guilty in December 2007 to 10 federal counts involving the kidnapping
and <a title="Torture" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture">torture</a> of
the children and the murder of Dylan at a remote campsite west of the <a title="Rocky
Mountain Front" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocky_Mountain_Front">Rocky Mountain
Front</a>, and was <a title="Capital
punishment" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment">sentenced to death</a>
under <i>federal</i> laws for kidnapping resulting in death (he had already
pleaded guilty in state court) on August 27, 2008. As of October 27, 2009,
Duncan was being tried in Riverside County, California for the 1997 murder of
Anthony Michael Martinez."</div>
<div> </div>
<div>There is a lot more, a horrifyingly graphic, sickening more.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I could have also cited a number of confessed serial murderers or used
those old favorites Hitler and Saddam Hussein.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Given your belief in the statement "There is not a single case where
capital punishment is justified." such counterexamples would not be persuasive
to you. You would still hold the above ethical principle to be
true despite the lack of a method to demonstrate it's truth. However, some
people might be persuaded that Duncan should be executed and make his case an
exception to their general opposition to capital punishment. In fact, I
know of at least one such person.</div>
<div> </div>
<div><strong>Until there is a method to establish the truth of general ethical
principles</strong> differences of opinion like ours are not likely to be
resolved. We may persuade each other about certain cases or classes of
cases (like those where guilt is questionable), but in general we have no way to
come to agreement like we might if we were arguing about the cause of diabetes
or whether syphilis is caused by urinating in the moonlight.</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>W.</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>----- Original Message ----- </div>
<blockquote style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir="ltr">
<div style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><b>From:</b>
<a title="sunilramalingam@hotmail.com" href="mailto:sunilramalingam@hotmail.com">Sunil Ramalingam</a> </div>
<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><b>To:</b> <a title="deco@moscow.com" href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">Art Deco</a> ; <a title="vision2020@moscow.com" href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">Vision 2020</a> </div>
<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><b>Sent:</b> Monday, March 15, 2010 7:15
PM</div>
<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><b>Subject:</b> RE: [Vision2020] Another good
argument for the death penalty</div>
<div><br></div>Not even him, and you want to kill for less than that.<br><br>
<hr>
From: <a href="mailto:deco@moscow.com"><a href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">deco@moscow.com</a></a><br>To: <a href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><a href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</a></a><br>Date: Mon, 15
Mar 2010 19:10:12 -0700<br>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Another good argument for
the death penalty<br><br>
<style>
.ExternalClass .ecxhmmessage P
{padding-bottom:0px;padding-left:0px;padding-right:0px;padding-top:0px;}
.ExternalClass BODY.ecxhmmessage
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10pt;}
</style>
<div>
<h1 id="ecxfirstHeading" class="ecxfirstHeading">Joseph E. Duncan III</h1></div>
<blockquote style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir="ltr">
<div style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </div>
<div style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><b>From:</b>
<a title="sunilramalingam@hotmail.com" href="mailto:sunilramalingam@hotmail.com">Sunil Ramalingam</a> </div>
<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><b>To:</b> <a title="deco@moscow.com" href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">Art Deco</a> ; <a title="vision2020@moscow.com" href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">Vision 2020</a> </div>
<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><b>Sent:</b> Monday, March 15, 2010 6:41
PM</div>
<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><b>Subject:</b> RE: [Vision2020] Another good
argument for the death penalty</div>
<div><br></div>I've never seen a good argument for the death penalty from
you, Wayne. <br><br>Sunil<br><br>
<hr>
From: <a href="mailto:deco@moscow.com"><a href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">deco@moscow.com</a></a><br>To: <a href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"><a href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</a></a><br>Date: Mon,
15 Mar 2010 16:15:37 -0700<br>Subject: [Vision2020] Another good argument
for the death penalty<br><br>
<style>
</style>
<div><font color="#ff0000" size="4"><strong>Another good argument for the death
penalty:</strong></font></div>
<div><font size="2"></font> </div>
<div><font size="2">
<p class="ecxecxpublish-date">Updated March 15, 2010</p>
<h1 id="ecxecxstory-title">Ex-Bank President Arrested for Allegedly Lying to
Get TARP Money</h1>
<p class="ecxecxauthor"></p>
<p class="ecxecxsource">AP </p>
<p id="ecxecxstory-dek" class="ecxecxdeck"><span class="ecxecxdateline"></span></p>The former president of a small community
bank was arrested on charges that he lied to the federal government to get a
piece of the bailout program, authorities said Monday.<br></font></div>
<div>
<div class="ecxecxbodytext ecxecxsmalltext">NEW YORK -- The former president
of a small community bank was arrested on charges that he lied to the
federal government to get a piece of the bailout program, authorities said
Monday.<br>Charles Antonucci Sr. was charged in a criminal complaint filed
in U.S. District Court in Manhattan with self-dealing, bank bribery,
embezzlement and fraud.<br>Authorities said the rip-off targeted the New
York State Banking Department, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and the
Troubled Asset Relief Program.<br>Antonucci resigned last year as president
of The Park Avenue Bank, which is headquartered in Manhattan with four
retail branches in Manhattan and Brooklyn.<br>Among other allegations,
Antonucci was accused of using false information to request $11 million from
the federal government's TARP bank bailout program.<br>The complaint accused
him of lying to banking authorities in late 2008 and early 2009 to make them
believe he had invested $6.5 million of his own money in the bank when the
money actually belonged to the bank.<br>After the application for TARP money
was rejected, Antonucci did a media interview in which he said the bank
withdrew its application because of "issues" with the TARP program and a
desire to avoid "market perception" that bad banks take TARP money, the
complaint said.<br>Federal authorities say Antonucci actually wanted to
obtain millions of dollars for his own use, in part so he could obtain a
controlling interest in the bank.<br>They said he also permitted a former
administrative assistant to obtain $400,000 of loans the assistant was not
qualified for. The complaint said the former assistant is now
cooperating.<br>The complaint alleged that Antonucci later used the former
bank employee's private plane on 10 or more occasions, including trips to
Phoenix to attend the Super Bowl, to Augusta, Ga., to watch the Master's
golf tournament, a flight to Florida to visit a relative and a flight to
Panama.<br>Antonucci's lawyer, Charles Stillman, said he had just gotten a
copy of the charges. He declined immediate
comment.<br></div></div></blockquote></blockquote>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>=======================================================</span><br><span> List services made available by First Step Internet, </span><br><span> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. </span><br><span> <a href="http://www.fsr.net">http://www.fsr.net</a> </span><br><span> <a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com"><a href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com</a></a></span><br><span>=======================================================</span></div></blockquote></body></html>