tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post116125227296996444..comments2023-10-29T10:32:36.914-04:00Comments on Philosophy, et cetera: Ethical HolismRichard Y Chappellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1161351118398757262006-10-20T09:31:00.000-04:002006-10-20T09:31:00.000-04:00Larry, are you sure you read my post? I used those...Larry, are you sure you read my post? I used those examples because I find them engaging, but if you are instead distracted by them, do set them aside. What I'm really interested in here is the PGI principle. Do you agree with it? (It's perfectly consistent with opposing sweatshops, of course. What it's <I>not</I> consistent with, as I explained, is approving of the general institution whilst denying the permissibility of participating in it. Since I gather you also oppose the former anyway, I don't think the present argument is any problem for you.)<BR/><BR/>P.S. While I welcome critical <I>arguments</I>, I don't appreciate being preached at. I've previously offered <A HREF="http://pixnaps.blogspot.com/2006/09/boycotting-needy.html" REL="nofollow">reasons</A> that, it seems to me, <I>really do</I> justify the offering of horrible jobs to people who want them. Perhaps my arguments are mistaken, in which case I invite reasoned refutations to be posted to the appropriate thread. But my intellectual honesty should not be in question, so it is simply disrespectful for you to preach at me about "rationaliz[ing] cruelty". If you're not going to offer any genuine <I>reasons</I> to think that I'm mistaken, then such claims on your part amount to nothing more than a <B>brute assertion of disagreement</B> -- which is grating enough without the gratuitous insults and "holier than thou" attitude.<BR/><BR/>(Perhaps your intended counterargument was that mine "can" also justify slavery? But of course that's simply bad reasoning -- “philosophic” or not -- because slaves are not <I>offered</I> jobs, they are <I>forced</I> into them. I was quite clear in my earlier post that my defence only applied to voluntary exchanges.)Richard Y Chappellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1161276209382486792006-10-19T12:43:00.000-04:002006-10-19T12:43:00.000-04:00You are on about sweat shops again, eh? Why stop t...You are on about sweat shops again, eh? Why stop there? The same rationalizations can be used for child labor or slavery. After all, those poor Africans found themselves in America without a job and the slave owner gave them one. I know this is not a very “philosophic” argument, but better philosophers than you – starting with Aristotle – have used their philosophy to rationalize cruelty. Nor should I add, do I believe that you are deliberately trying to rationalize away the crime of sweat shops, but merely engaging in speculation, however, this sort of philosophical speculation can be used to justify inhuman activity. And, by the way, my world view has always been holistic, which is why I oppose sweat shops....Larry Gambonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04965037776214596919noreply@blogger.com