iambiguous wrote: ↑Thu Apr 28, 2022 7:31 pm I have no clear understanding of what this has to do with the points I raise above regarding Henry and bazookas.
Slow and methodical in regard to the political conflagration that revolves around private citizens buying and selling bazookas? Leaping to implications pertaining to the relationship between private citizens and the government in regard to, say, the 2nd Amendment here in America?
Is Henry achieving "clarity" here more than I am?
He's clear alright. You think as he does or...or you are wrong? And somehow he connects the dots here between bazookas and his Deist God and Reason and Nature.
How they all come together "in his head" allowing him buy and sell bazookas -- and grenades? and mortar rounds? and rockets? and 50 cal. machine guns? and howitzers? -- with a clean conscience.
That's not the point.Walker wrote: ↑Fri Apr 29, 2022 3:35 am Well, when the tank is rolling down the road to flatten your house and/or your body, as the owner of that body*, you would find a bazooka to be a handy and necessary tool to defend your life during your last stand. What you do is hide in the bushes, then when the tank rolls by you aim at the treads, whistle Dixie pull the trigger and hope it works.
The point is what happens in any particular community when some people "own" themselves and conclude it is moral [and ought to be legal] to buy and sell tanks and bazookas, while others in "owning" themselves, conclude it is immoral [and thus ought to be illegal] to buy and sell tanks and bazookas.
Yes, obviously, if, in Henry's ideal community, his neighbor is permitted to buy a tank it would be reasonable for him to buy a bazooka if that neighbor comes after him with the tank. But is this the sort of community his Deist God subscribes to in imploring mere mortals to "follow the dictates of Reason and Nature"? Are there Desists out there opposed to the buying selling of tanks and bazookas?
Can No God philosophers using the tools at their disposal come up with the most rational and virtuous Humanist argument that would resolve this political conflict?
Let's hear it.
I've explained the distinction I make here between I in the either/or world and "I" in the is/ought world regarding such things as buying and selling bazookas. And it it is nothing at all like Henry's assessment above and elsewhere.
So this...
...is preposterous to me in regard to conflicting value judgments.
