5/17    "I don't care much about world perception of the US.  The right
        thing to do is sometimes unpopular." says emarkp. Mr. Ping,
        can you please explain to me what is right and what is wrong?
        Who is the arbiter of righteousness? People? God? If God, then
        which God? And if Bible, which version? How about Koran,
        is that right or wrong?
                 \_ Restored. If you don't feel like answering, don't.
        \_ No Mr. Anonymous Troll. -emarkp
           \_ It's a valid question. Knowing who wrote it is not relevant to
              the core of the question. The fact that you need to know who
              wrote it says a lot about your character and belief.
              And good job for nuking responses.
              \_ Oh, I thought the question was for me.  So I nuked the one
                 parodying me and the rest for completeness.  I don't answer
                 questions from anonymous trolls. -emarkp
                 \_ Restored. If you don't feel like answering, don't.
        \_ those who are agree with me and share the same values are right.
           those who are not are wrong.  simple.
           \- hello, this is too big a topic to try and lay out something
           \- hello, this is too big a topic to try to lay out something
              comprehensive, but one thought: without being a full-blown
              relativist or a hardcore "might makes right" adherant [both of
              whom are to some extent begging the question, sometimes con-
              sciously doing so], it is not unreasonable to believe different
              standards apply in "society" and in the "state of nature".
              if you are looking out for yourself in the Stag Hunt scenario
              than is different from stealing from your neighbor in berkeley,
              ca. you can certainly debate to what extent is the international
              system like the anarchic [meaning non-hierarchical with no
              ruler who can "lay down the law", not meaning it is chaotic]
              international system vs a "community" with norms and standards.
              \- this may be a little hard to follow if you dont have some
                 knowledge of the framework/tradition i am coming from.
                 a concrete example of this difference in standards is how
                 you assess the question "is lying bad?" is different
                 in the context of friends, companies and soverign states.
                 ok tnx.
                 you assess the question "is lying bad?" in the context of
                 friends, companies and soverign states. ok tnx.
        \_ While there is no "absolute right", there are time when it's
           pretty clear.  One hopes that one's leadership would be wise and
           differentiated enough to know when this is the case.  -John
        \_ In discussion right and wrong, the concept of right does not
           necessarily flow from the notion of divinity. Assume for the
           sake of argument that the big bad universe doesn't give a damn
           about what a bunch of overgrown hair-less apes are doing on
           this minor world.  These same apes can have relative notions
           of right and wrong that help to maximize their long-term
           survival and order their affairs.
           The conflict is thus based purely on the choices that a subset
           subset of the species feels maximizes the overall survival.
           A choice may be right, in that it maximizes overall long-term
           survival, but unpopular, in that it creates short-term barriers
           to survival for many.
           \_ Almost correct, but wrong. You need to rephrase your last part
              to "A choice may be considered right in that it is BELIEVED
              to maximize..." The point is, 1) you don't know the future
              and 2) past does not always predict the future because life
              has too many variables to consider. Either you're a dumb ass
              or I've been trolled.
              \_ I guess this wasn't clear.  Whether the choice was right
                 or wrong can only be judged in retrospect. In the present
                 it is unknowable whether the choice was right.
                 it is unknowable whether the choice was right. The belief
                 that something is right in the present is based on the
                 notion that your mind has been able to predict the outcome
                 based on the information that is available.
           \_ Yes this is again aligned in conservative point of view. How
              do you know with certainty that the money you spent on war
              will in the future improve Iraq? There are lots of other things
              you can spend your 300 billion on to improve other parts of the
              world, and you think that a regime change (resulting in massive
              Arab humiliation and resentment) is good in the long term?
              I hope there is God, so that you'd go to hell.
        \_ No Mr. Anonymous Troll. -emarkp
              \_ I never said the Iraq war was right. I said that it could
                 be right. For example, the argument you have made was made
                 by many re Revolutionary War, Civil War, Desegregation, &c.
                 The idea that freedom maximizes suvival of the species was
                 the basis for entering into those conflicts and may be
                 considered the basis for entering into the present conflict.
                 As this idea has served our species well in the past, one
                 cannot be faulted for believing that it will serve us in
                 this and future conflicts.
        \_ BTW, I have an email address. -emarkp
                 \_ Why does this keep getting deleted?