On Jul 23, 8:46=A0pm, no...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(PeterBP) wrote:
> Mark M. <m...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > Is the common good really so hard a concept to grasp?
>
> No, but as Aristotle said, an educated man can entertain an idea without
> believeing in it; the same goes for the "commong good" as it goes for
> Snoopy and The Buddy Birds.
>
> The problem with this mythological concept is that its proponents never
> bother to accurately define it, delineate it, enumerate how good the
> common good is, and who it is good for, etc. When challenged to
> specificy what this "common good" exactly is, it usually goes straight
> from appearently reasoned debate to screaming and mudslinging, and lots
> of accusations of egoism, anti-social mindset, indifference to suffering
> of others, etc and blah-blah-blah ad nauseam of the poor fool who had
> the indecency to challenge this exalted idea.
>
> Furthermore, it is used to excuse senseless expansion of scope and
> powers of government, even for things that only a madman would claim to
> be "good", much less a "common good".
>
>
As usual, refuting this stuff is almost too easy.
If you are trying to have a philosophical discussion, and someone
offers a definition, then it is possible to continue the conversation
based on that definition. For example, if I define a circle as a
geometric figure with four sides of equal length at right angles to
each other, we can continue to discuss geometry quite nicely.
The only reason for you to raise this business is that you are
interested in propaganda/politics, not a philosophical discussion. So
here:
I define a common good as a good that is held by all members of a
group. That is no more difficult to understand than saying that some
group has a common eye color.
So if all members of a group wish to have a life span of at least 72
years, living to 72 is a common good.
-tg
>
> > The absence of a bad thing is a good thing.
>
> No, it can also be neutral. The commonly used term "not bad" is, true
> enough, usually used to mean "what you did was pretty good", but
> logically it encomp***** both the concepts of "good" and "neutral".
> First fallacy.
>
> > =A0For an individual, the absence
> > of bad health is good health.
>
> True, but that is =A0for most people a case of lingual difference from
th=
e
> logival roots of the words. For others "good health" could mean being a
> top-fit s****tsman or athletic.
>
> > =A0"How are you doing today." =A0"Not bad." =A0Not
> > bad means good.
>
> As described above, no.
>
>
>
> > It is the same for a community.
>
> Since the cases of communities are not precisely equivalent to cases of
> single individuals, no. Second fallacy.
>
> > =A0An example of a common bad would be a
> > disease epidemic. =A0So a common good would be absence of disease
epide=
mic.
>
> Only if there was an actual impending threat of such an epidemic.
>
> By the same reasoning, absence of 60 yard tall green space aliens from
> Mars that go about destroying your city is also a good. Only problem is
> that we have no reason to believe that such exist. Third fallacy.
>
> > Poisoning of the water supply would be a common bad, so a common good
i=
s a
> > good water supply.
>
> Same applies as above.
>
> > =A0A law prohibiting freedom of speech would be a common
> > bad so just laws are a common good.
>
> "Just" remains undefined, and therefor the proposition cannot be
> ascribed any significant truth value.
>
> > =A0A common bad would be an attacking
> > army or a raging fire.
>
> Again, you make assumptions that are not universally true. Is an
> attacking army bad if all it does is kill the populace, before it's
> done? I think most people would agree. OTOH, is it bad if it kills some
> people, but removes a tyrant in the process?
>
> > =A0So a common good is peace and no fires. =A0And so on.
>
> > Mark M.
>
> Your reasoning leaves much to be desired, and your claims about the
> existence of a "common good" does not touch on any of the criticisms of
> the concept having been offered in these groups.
>
> --
> - Peter ***http://titancity.com/blog/
> "Don't go around saying the world owes you a living. The world owes
> you nothing. It was here first." - Mark Twain
|
