[Sigia-l] morality in IA

[Derek R]

Bill wrote:
>| Of course there is no single answer.
>| Questions about ethics and morality have
>| no answers, other than, "it depends." 

Actually Bill, [although I think you understand this, I would like to be
crystal-clear], with questions of morality and ethics there is *no*
partiality. 

Being 'right' about something has nothing to do with circumstance or
context. You either are, or you are not (a single answer). There is no
grey-area.

It would be misleading and dangerous to suggest a flexible morality.
That if, for instance, an Orthodox Christian went to Las Vegas suddenly
it would become ok to gamble.

One doesn't need to look far in history to see atrocities which were
carried out based on a presumed position/partiality (favorable prejudice
or bias) like Croatia/Bosnia, Nazi Germany, or South Africa.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=partiality
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=morality

It would be convenient to say, as a current example, that Israelis have
observably suffered great persecution, so therefore it is ok for them to
enslave a Palestinian population. Here the question of morality being
'dependent' on perceived situation. Unfortunately it doesn't work that
way.

_________________________________

Every man gotta right
To decide his own destiny
And in this judgment
There is no partiality
http://bobmarley.com/songs/lyrics/zimbabwe.lyrics.txt