Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Has nothing to do with anyone's mindset, this is the rules of logic. Mordant even said that it's not possible to have an universal definition of the word so why is this even been discussed? If something has a condition for it when we are talking about it having an absolute answer it has to be no. These are the rules of logic that mathematicians, lawyers, and others use. So the answer is no we cannot universally define harm. It's that simple.
Logic never asks yes or no.
It asks true or false. The two should not be confused. One is a value judgement open for debate, and the other is either true, or false. Both are not logic.
There are rules for logical reason. Stuff like, if A then B, or if A then not B.. and so forth.
Can you mathematically define your premise, or are you appealing to a higher authority thinking we will believe something just because lawyers and mathematicians do it. You give them worth thinking it supports your premise.
Last edited by RonkonkomaNative; 03-27-2015 at 04:30 PM..
Reason: edit
How do you know that slavery is wrong? I'm not suggesting that it's good in any way...but what tells you that it's wrong?
This too has been answered, just not with proofs or by gods. It does harm to others, it is not moral in our opinions for lack of a better word for one person to own another.
Why is it wrong for societies to decide collectively what is immoral without a god needed? Slavery was permitted according to the Bible whereas putting any other gods before yours was not (10 commandments). If I was god I would have posted no slavery, no raping and no littering long before the selfish ones he placed first.
This too has been answered, just not with proofs or by gods. It does harm to others, it is not moral in our opinions for lack of a better word for one person to own another.
Sorry---you're appealing to something that is not proven. You're making assumptions that harm = immoral. That's begging the question. You can't do that.
In logic there are universal agreements without having, or needing independent validation. It does not require evidence or support. A priori.
Therefore we can agree slavery, rape, and and all sorts of things are wrong. Our deductive ability to reason tell us this is true.
You are begging the question. We cannot KNOW that these things are wrong. After all...in 1800 America, slavery was considered good. In some cultures today, rape would not be considered wrong in some circumstances.
Sorry---you're appealing to something that is not proven. You're making assumptions that harm = immoral. That's begging the question. You can't do that.
With God not proven we cannot get morality from there so I guess that we cannot have morality or immorality.
You are begging the question. We cannot KNOW that these things are wrong. After all...in 1800 America, slavery was considered good. In some cultures today, rape would not be considered wrong in some circumstances.
Slavery being accepted was certainly not universally accepted. This example does not apply.
If we consider the following.
Violence is wrong
Rape is violent
Rape is wrong.
We can accept this as a universal truth.
Rape in other cultures is also wrong, but simple deductive reasoning. Can you make another case?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
