What point has Firehammer made by issuing questionably ‘logical’ edicts?
Wasn’t he merely giving an example of either/or—law of the excluded middle? Maybe I missed something?
“Wasn’t he merely giving an example of either/or—law of the excluded middle?”
That’s right. There is no ambiguity about the terms good and bad. That’s the game of postivists (think post-modernists and moral relativism). Value terms like good and bad are tems of a relationship, and are always in the context, “with this purpose or end in mind,” x is good, or x is bad. It is only when the context is left out, or when an abiguous or vague end or purpose is intentionally used as the context that the obfuscation of absolute values is possible. It’s a kind of dishonesty, as all obfuscation is, and attempt to justify wrong—”after all, good and bad are only relative.”
Regi