From: livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Subject: Re: After 2000 years, can we say that Christian Morality is
Organization: sgi
Lines: 31
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com

In article <1qm069$fm8@horus.ap.mchp.sni.de>, frank@D012S658.uucp (Frank O'Dwyer) writes:
|> In article <1qkndq$k@fido.asd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
|> #In article <1qjbn0$na4@horus.ap.mchp.sni.de>, frank@D012S658.uucp (Frank O'Dwyer) writes:
|> #|> In article <kmr4.1571.734847050@po.CWRU.edu> kmr4@po.CWRU.edu (Keith M. Ryan) writes:
|> #|> #	You have only pushed back the undefined meaning. You must now define 
|> #|> #what "objective values" are.
|> #|> 
|> #|> Really?  You don't know what objective value is?  If I offered the people
|> #|> of the U.S., collectively, $1 for all of the land in America, would that 
|> #|> sound like a good deal?  
|> #
|> #You mean that if you can find a ridiculous price, the rest of
|> #us are supposed to conclude that an objectively correct price
|> #exists?
|> 
|> I said nothing about the price.  I asked if the deal was good.  It isn't.

So it was a complete non-sequitur, is that it?     How does coming
up with a derisory deal tell us anything about the existence of
"objective" values.

You're asking us to accept that the deal you offered would be turned
down, and we believe that, not because we appeal to objective values
but becasue we know, or think we know, something about people.

All the people we know exhibit *subjective* values that would lead
them to reject a deal of $1 for all of the land in America.

Great.   Now, so what?

jon. 
