Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:Originally posted by Shorteous:Originally posted by HessianDud:Originally posted by Shorteous:Originally posted by 9erfanAUS:
I find it really curious that Hessian is one of the few here who has sided with the NFLPA*.
-9fA
lol
ideology speaks larger than actual right and wrong.
how do you definite right and wrong without ideology?
Well, I would guess in order to deem this as right you'd have to hold a kantianism like ideology where right and wrong is determined by the greatest good for the greatest amount of people.
Basically marginalizing the the best out come for the draftee because it brings greater good to the NFLPA's negotiating position. Although it doesn't so it is now being scratched from the tactic list.
But your right, ideology is correlated to your individual right and wrong. I think we can all generally agree that the situation is right for kantianism but I think we can all agree that kantianism is not an appropriate means to determine morality. At least if your a minority you better believe that kantianism is not the best means to determine right and wrong.
that's utilitarianism.
-9fA
I guess it's not quite kantianism, it is basically a spin off of the greatest happiness principle which was more from Mill than it was from Kant.