[the guy who be short]

Originally Posted by Raynor

I don't think I follow, can you please rephrase?

Okay. I'll reproduce those two quotes here.

Originally Posted by Raynor

What is your argument here? That a certain thing is good because it is popular? That, in and of itself, is an instance of "ad populum" fallacy. Yes, I argue that there is a degree of immorality if we delight in evil qualities, and the fact that many people find it acceptable doesn't make it so. If I may quote Gandhi, the truth is the truth even if spoken by one single person.

Originally Posted by Raynor

Norm is a standard notion in ethics and morality.

In the first quote, you say that popularity cannot be used to define morality. Consensus does not equal righteousness. The many cannot justify acts of evil by virtue of being many.

In the second quote, you seem to contradict yourself by saying that the "norm" - that is, the majority view - is a standard notion in ethics, and that a majority view is an ethical one.

Obviously you can't hold both these contradictory views at once, so you must choose one. If you choose the latter, then morality is defined by culture. If you choose the former, then it is pointless to discuss the issue of morality with you, because you'll be certain that your morality is the only right one.

Would you draw no conclusions about a reader if they were genuinely to sympathise with the stated aims and actions of Big Brother and thought Winston Smith had it coming to him, or if they were genuinely to regard Hannibal Lecter’s cannibalism as acceptable?

There have been many cultures where cannibalism is seen as perfectly acceptable. Obviously it would be a little odd if the man down the street in Britain started eating people, but you can't just say that anybody who has belonged to a cannibalistic culture is evil.


The argument between davem and raynor seems rather cyclical. So, if I may, I'll bring in amorality again.

Originally Posted by Terry Pratchett

Humans need fantasies to make life bearable... Show me one atom of justice. One molecule of mercy. And yet you act like there was some sort of rightness in the universe by which it may be judged.

Isn't the whole argument about morality pointless, seeing as what evil is is entirely subjective? Can't we just accept that if somebody likes orcs, then they are evil according to the 1000th reader, Raynor or Thenamir, and not evil according to Lalwende and Davem?