Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

Re: Talking Ethics

Loading...

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

Uploaded by on Nov 30, 2007

Response for clarification on perception and bases for ethics and values in Talking Ethic video.

Category:

Education

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

  • likes, 0 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Uploader Comments (firemansvfd)

  • "If you have a finite point and it has no infinite reference point, then that finite point is absurd" This vierw from Sartre is, I think, a valid one. We find value in our (and other's) existence from a transcendent, absolute (infinite) value, since things in themselves have no meaning, apart from the meaning we might (or might not) give them.

  • For a naturalist, a pragmatic value based on a quid pro quo relationship might suffice. We allow the freedoms/rights/respect in other that we desire for ourselves. So much more could be said about the necessity of law in freedom, but I think you are already in sync with that line of thought. Thanks, Ben, for sharing and stretching my mind.

Video Responses

This video is a response to Talking Ethics, 4/4
see all

All Comments (1)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Oh yes, I very intentionally sidestepped a lot in this series for the sake of brevity. Quick thought on humility: are my beliefs about a person more important than that person? Do I consider them as such?

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