Re: Bouncing Philosophical Checks.

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
153 views
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Dec 3, 2009

Video Cam Direct Upload

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

  • likes, 5 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Video Responses

This video is a response to Bouncing Philosophical Checks.
see all

All Comments (1)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • To your first point, he DID explain his point on that. He explained that this isn't a normative fact in the sense that "We ought not run over people with our car for fun, period." And in fact, it's only true for situation, "I ought not run over people with my car for fun IF I want to be accepted in society" or "IF I want to like myself."

    To your second point, no, it wouldn't be an example of at was asked for. It's simply a statement of what IS the case, not what ought be the case.

Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more