Thanks. It seems like small details of phrasing have a lot of significance on this topic. For example: > Is eating meat an absolute evil (people should univer

Thanks. It seems like small details of phrasing have a lot of significance on this topic. For example: > Is eating meat an absolute evil (people should universally agree that it's evil) or a relative one (it's permitted for people hold differing opinions on whether it is evil)? That seems to suggest a two-tier system of ethics. At one level, and act is considered conditionally evil depending on the viewpoint of the person committing the act. But implicitly there seems to be another level at play: the universal applicability of good/evil being relative to each individual's belief system. Gah... I really regret not taking some philosophy courses in college. I'm sure this issue has been covered ad nauseum for at least 3000 years.