Tags: How To Write Essay For ScholarshipJatropha Biodiesel Business PlanEssays Shakespeare'S LifeRestaurant Franchise Business PlanBest Excuses For Not Doing Your HomeworkHow Do I Cite DissertationsThe Tempest EssayMeaning Of HomeworkSparks Of The Logos Essays In Rabbinic HermeneuticsResume Cover Letters For Paralegals
Unless those who rely on such language can elaborate, we are left with category-headings but nothing to fill the space beneath. to which we might add ‘modem’, ‘inclusive’, ‘responsive’, as well as William Hague’s favourite – ‘fresh’ – and Tony Blair’s beloved ‘new’.All sound splendid, but in fact denote qualities which may be possessed equally by the virtuous, the wicked, the wise, the ignorant or the plain stupid.
Every end of desire that presents itself appears exclusive of some other end of desire.
Shall a man drink and smoke, [...] neither the whole of truth nor the whole of good is revealed to any single observer, although each observer gains a partial superiority of insight from the particular position in which he stands [...] It is enough to ask each of us that he should be faithful to his own opportunities and make the most of his own blessings, without presuming to regulate the rest of the vast field.[...] s’il y a une Vérité, une et universelle, qui nous est révélée par la religion ou par la science, et en dehors de laquelle il n’y a ni bonheur individuel ni ordre social, la liberté n’a pas sa raison d’être, elle n’existe que négativement [...]The ends in an ethical situation are, then, variously described in the above as incompatible, discrepant, heterogeneous, opposed.
This brought me up short, because Hegel, in his lectures on aesthetics (translated by T. Knox as , Oxford, 1975), speaks of ‘the collision of equally justified powers and individuals’ and gives the following as an example: ‘Agamemnon, as King and commander of the army, sacrifices his daughter in the interest of the Greeks and the Trojan expedition; thereby he snaps the bond of love for his daughter and his wife’ (1213). Schneewind (London, 1969: Routledge; New York, 1969: Humanities Press) question.
In all but name, this sounds very much like an explicitly pluralist conflict of values to me. 32: 29–30 in the edition by Oskar Kraus and Roderick M. Here we are, in a world where the existence of a divine Thinker has been and perhaps always will be doubted by some of the lookers on, and where, in spite of the presence of a large number of ideals, in which human beings agree, there are a mass of others about which no general consensus obtains.
It is the glorious liberty of the sons of God to inform all, to quicken all, to cherish all, to enrich all, under the immediate eye of the great and good Giver of all.
Hitler had values; Marx had core values; the Taleban have family values; lunatic asylums overflow with people with beliefs; Stalin was a stickler for standards; Robespierre did not lack ideals; Pol Pot had vision; Chairman Mao had a mission; Sir Oswald Mosley cannot be accused of lacking a sense of duty.
They replied they would not do it for any money in the world.
Later, in the presence of the Greeks, and through an interpreter, so that they could understand that was said, he asked some Indians, of the tribe called Callatiae, who do in fact eat their parents’ dead bodies, what they would take to burn them (as was the custom of the Greeks).
The elementary forces in ethics are probably as plural as those of physics are.
The various ideals have no common character apart from the fact that they are ideals.