Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 (Fortune 01.1b1); site graffiti.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!shell!graffiti!peter
From: peter@graffiti.UUCP (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Definitions of Morality
Message-ID: <133@graffiti.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 30-Aug-85 14:45:33 EDT
Article-I.D.: graffiti.133
Posted: Fri Aug 30 14:45:33 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 1-Sep-85 13:21:17 EDT
References: <1358@umcp-cs.UUCP> <1700@psuvax1.UUCP> <1410@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Organization: Information Brokerage Network, Houston, TX
Lines: 5

> >> The curious fact is, absolute moral relativism is self-contradictory,
> >> because it states a moral absolute.

Has anyone ever pointed out Godel's Theorem to you? It's possible to create
a contradiction in any complete logical system. Why should morality be exempt?