3 ms·
Even if your belief were true, it is an odd definition of a "flourish" that assigns all weight to the material dimensions of a society and none to the moral. I
by another 12y ago
Even if your belief were true, it is an odd definition of a "flourish" that assigns all weight to the material dimensions of a society and none to the moral.
It becomes particularly odd when discussing the leadership of an organization with a substantial moral component to its stated mission [1].
[1] http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/ http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/about/manifesto/
- natural219 12y agoThis is a good point. Flourishing does not imply moral behavior. I think the "flourish" comment is an embellishment to my main argument, which does center around the morality of holding somebody accountable for a view they expressed six years in the past. Taking it a step further, I do feel that, given enough space, I could defend the idea that a society's moral imperatives are quite tied to how it gets its corn-pone [1]. This is several levels beyond the scope of my comment, though. [1] http://www.paulgraham.com/cornpone.html http://www.paulgraham.com/cornpone.html
- floody-berry 12y agoA view they expressed six years ago, have not rescinded or clarified, and, oddly enough, is largely supported by their political donations going back 20 years [1]. [1] http://tim.dreamwidth.org/1845008.html http://tim.dreamwidth.org/1845008.html