Philosophical Quandry: Piracy

[Fyron]

I have redefined no terms. I have only stated that the practices of morality in different cultures are not the same.

Also, I will have to repeat myself by saying that my original question had nothing to do with other cultures, but with US culture. Within a culture, morality is absolute. But outside of that culture, its moral values are not absolute, and they vary from culture to culture. I was never talking about oppressive cultures, but about morality in general. There are a near-infinite amounts of variations on moral issues that have nothing to do with oppression or killing.

The tangent I started was not related to the original question (as it was not asking about moral values in other cultures, just US culture), but to your statement that moraliy is absolutely static, which it is most certainly not.

[ July 11, 2003, 23:12: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

quote:

---

Theft and murder are universal absolutes.

Yes, they are universal absolutes. But, what is theft and what is murder is not absolute. What the view on the good/evil nature of these actions is not absoulte. This is where the relative nature of morality comes into play.

---

Well, then. This is a deep comment and not one that is easily dismissed I will agree. However, you yourself in your original statment established your acceptance that the practice was illegal. You even defined it as piracy, a statment I wouldn't neccesarily so so far as to say.

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Yes, it is beyond a shadow of a doubt illegal piracy. I am not asking about legality, but about morality. Is it wrong to do this? Why or why not?

You also later sought to keep the discussion on the issue of moarlity for our culture in the United States...

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
My question had nothing to do with other cultures, but with the culture in which we live (broad US culture).

So by your own statements making copies and distributing them is illegal. If it is illegal is it not theft? Are you saying it's illegal by some other basis but it is not theft? Is that how it can be illegal and not immoral?

Or are you sayign that theft is not immoral according to broad US culture?

I am not that suprised you are having problems with this though. These are the sorts of conundrums you find yourself in when you don't have moral absolutes.

Geoschmo

[Fyron]

Damn it... I guess you didn't see the "PLEASE WAIT" sign...

Geo, the very nature of your previous Posts directly implied that you were judging other cultural views and asserting that yours is absolutely superior (which you continue to do in the latter part of your Last post).

The fact that some people and some cultures choose to ignore or redefine the terms to ease their concseince merely means those people and cultures are immoral.

This is a prime example. Most moral issues have absolutely nothing to do with redefining terms or ignoring your specific (and relative) moral values, or with easing the conscience. Moral values are not absolute. You only think that their concseince needs easing because their views conflict with your own. I am sorry that everyone in the world does not think as you do.

In the past in European cultures, it was considered morally acceptable to marry at ages of around 14. In the US, this is generally found to be apprehensible (statutory rape and such applies here). Does that mean that those ancient European cultures were immoral? Did they redefine any terms? Did they attempt to ease their conscience? No, to all of the above. Going the other way, does that mean that we here in the US are immoral because we view it as wrong to marry under 18? Have we redefined any terms to attempt to ease our conscience? No. This is a good example of the relative nature of morality that directly contradicts your claims. Who is to say which view is the more morally correct one? You have made the claim that you have that right indirectly through the nature of your Posts. And then you attempt to backpeddle away from this by claiming you are not able to judge, but you already have done so.

[geoschmo]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Damn it... I guess you didn't see the "PLEASE WAIT" sign...

Fyron, I am tired of going around and around with you on every single issue. You win.

But watch your tone in the future.I had started my second post before your had completed your post, much less put in your "edit in progress" comment. It wasn't there for me to see, "damn it".

Geoschmo

[Fyron]

First off, note that I often play devil's advocate for the sake of debate. Not everything I post is actually a representation of my personal views. The relative nature of morality is, but not everything else is. This of course does not invalidate any post I have made, so please do not commit that fallacy.

So by your own statements making copies and distributing them is illegal. If it is illegal is it not theft? Are you saying it's illegal by some other basis but it is not theft? Is that how it can be illegal and not immoral?

Please note that I never once said whether making copies and distributing them is morally right or wrong. It is certainly illegal, but legal and moral are wholely unrelated concepts. They sometimes coincide, but that is more often than not coincidence, and is again all relative. Some laws are based on certain moral views, but those moral views are relative, and they change continuously with the passage of time. Actions that were immoral at one point are moral now, and vice versa. Right back to the relative nature of morality.

Or are you sayign that theft is not immoral according to broad US culture?

I am not saying either way. I am not talking about theft in general either, but a very specific action. The crux of the original question of the thread is whether it is immoral or not, which (like everything) is open to debate.

I am not that suprised you are having problems with this though.

I have not had any problems, as I have not stated anything in regards to the morality of the action.

These are the sorts of conundrums you find yourself in when you don't have moral absolutes.

You are having more conundrums than I am Geo.

[Fyron]

Originally posted by geoschmo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Damn it... I guess you didn't see the "PLEASE WAIT" sign...

Fyron, I am tired of going around and around with you on every single issue. You win.

But watch your tone in the future.I had started my second post before your had completed your post, much less put in your "edit in progress" comment. It wasn't there for me to see, "damn it".

Geoschmo

---

No, I was writing a new post. I had posted the stuff I was going to edit in there as a new post, and got sidetracked from removing the "please wait" request. Don't be so impatient on ICQ.

Also, there is nothing wrong with the tone of that sentence. I guess if you see something wrong with it that is from your particular view on ettiquite which, like morality, is entirely relative. My view is that the word damn is not a wrong word to use. If you are offended by it, I am sorry, but it will remain.

[Fyron]

Fyron, I am tired of going around and around with you on every single issue. You win.

Bah. It was not my intention to "win", but to hold a debate.

[Erax]

Fyron, this time I actually followed you all the way through the argument. One of us is getting better at this.

So now I'm curious, what ARE your views ? I knew you were playing devil's advocate back there with the 15000 copies post, but what is YOUR opinion ?

[Gryphin]

EDIT:
As I was preparing my second post in this thread, (the one just before Geo’s), I realized this is not a matter of law or philosophy. It is a matter of morals
My first post came to the wrong conclusion.

I break rules all the time. I don’t violate persons intent that I have agreed to. Installing the game I agree to abide by the EULA.

-----------
This comes down to following the
Letter of the Law
Or
The intent of the Law

For the most part I have always followed the intent
The most important part I summarize on the Home page of my site:
“In my youth I was taught that first you must learn the rules, (and understand them), before you can break them. Later in life I developed the corollary, Sometimes you must break the rules before you can learn them, (and understand them)”

My understanding is the intent of the law would make Fyron’s concept legitimate.
In saying so I do not forget it is still ileagle.

[ July 11, 2003, 15:28: Message edited by: Gryphin ]

[Thermodyne]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:

quote:

---

Fyron, I am tired of going around and around with you on every single issue. You win.

Bah. It was not my intention to "win", but to hold a debate.

---

LOL, heck Kazz, I'm in a mood tonight. What side of this do you want me to take.