Sunday, July 25, 2004
A ground for ethics.
I’m not going to go into a lot of detail here, despite how it may appear from the length of this post, because this topic has myriad minute but significant details. Rather, I’d just like to use this post to clarify some things I think Mustafa may misunderstand about my position. It’s not his fault, really, because I didn’t give a lot of detail - I only provided a sketch. And I don’t really want to make this a philosophy blog. But Mustafa makes a few leaps about what I think, and I will clarify a few points about what I said.
[UPDATE]
I’ve removed my post content. If someone really wants it, I’ll email it. I just decided I didn’t want to get into a big back and forth about this. Mustafa’s post bugged me, because it betrays a deep misunderstanding of both my post and my own beliefs, but I feel that getting into it - and I wrote a long, 1000 word response - is just going to fan the flames.
For example, Andy might spend a bunch of time criticizing my post, which I’d then have to respond to, then Mustafa might have another go,...etc. I don’t have the time or energy for it right now, particularly because, to do this topic justice, I expect that I’d need to spend an hour or two on each entry. I’ve got some big new projects on the go at work and Juliana’s starting to complain about how much I work, and those two things are more important to me right now than debating ethics and theology.
I will take this opportunity to say, however, that if POI allowed comments, I *would* have responded there. I don’t like having to make responding to someone else’s criticism of me into a top-line post on my blog.
I don’t really get it. If you’re gonna criticize other people, it would be nice to let them post their rebuttal in the same place. The way POI does it, it forces their agenda on other blogs, should those they choose to comment on want to reply. That doesn’t seem very fair to me.
