[110] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
Re: Objectivist morals (was RE: LIVING WAGE SIT-IN AT HARVARD (fwd) )
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Boris Zbarsky)
Fri Apr 20 13:06:25 2001
Message-Id: <200104201705.NAA24607@nerd-xing.mit.edu>
To: Benazeer Noorani <benazeer@MIT.EDU>
cc: mit-talk@MIT.EDU
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:14:08 EDT."
<v04020a1db705fed22756@[18.238.2.202]>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 13:05:21 -0400
From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
> I have less respect for agnostics than atheists because I see agnosticism
> as a copout. I only have anecdotal evidence to support my opinion, but the
> majority of agnostics I"ve met have been too lazy to really examine issues
> of eternity, hell, good, evil, God, etc. and come to an intelligent
> conclusion of their own.
You seem to have missed all the agnostics who _have_ examined the issues
and decided that "eternity", "hell", "God", and "good/evil" are pretty
unrelated. And that some of them are irrelevant to living life in a
fulfilling way and functioning decently as a member of society. All
these judgements are subjective of course -- for many the concepts of
"God" and "good/evil" (for example) are intertwined. But they certainly
don't have to be.
> Of course, I have equally little respect for anyone who blindly
> follows the religion of their parents without really examining whether
> they believe it to be true or not.
Hmm. What about someone who follows the cultural practices of their
parents (admittedly a vague concept)?
Boris
-----------------
617-764-2453
-----------------
Once at a social gathering, Gladstone said to Disraeli,
"I predict, Sir, that you will die either by hanging or
of some vile disease". Disraeli replied, "That all
depends upon whether I embrace your principles or your
mistress".
