I can think of no better example, timely, current and totally representative than the one I used for the topic you presented and upon which you expanded. The concept of morality applied to preemptive war would seem to be a great base from which to start defining the topic.
There's the morality of the political leadership, the military leadership, the military people, the civilians. The morality of a nation as opposed to the morality if the individual. I believe, for instance, there is such a thing as a war crime without the perpetrators being war criminals. I've seen it. Not understanding how you might discuss morality and ignore such issues is one of my limitations.
If you want to discuss "morality" strictly within the limits of shooting dogs or burning flags, say so. Be warned, those may be hot issues for some people.
Before you get too miffed, though, you might set out the boundaries of your topic, with "here there be miff" guidelines. For instance, you culd say it's OK to talk about the morality of shooting dogs. However, the morality of shooting Third World people is well over my miff threshold. Or, it's OK to talk about burning flags, but burning those same people is a bit gross to be included in a friendly little morality discourse.
Arf
Off Topic » in reply to Can you spell Hijack?
How do you spell "topical relevant example"?
The whole thread (60 posts)
- What is morality?
- re: What is morality?
- Morality. (A very technical definition)
- re: Humanism?
- What is morality?
- re: What is morality?
- You don't have to be religious to have morality.
- An issue. Involves empathy, which is lacking in True Believers.
