Tuesday, 30 December 2008

Each to their own?

While driving I was listening to a review on R4 of a newly published book, Moral Relativism, and a discussion on that topic. Perhaps you won't be surprised to read that I sometimes find it difficult not to explode at the mere mention of "each to their own". I'm afraid that in my opinion (and it's certainly not mine alone), keeping to an "each to their own" philosophy, if it can be called such, means a person is unlikely to be an active nuisance, which might be good, BUT, of course, if you stick to that "philosophy", you are unlikely ever to be instrumental in improving any of the bad behaviour of people on this planet.

"Each to their own" is what some folks say, but I can think of a huge number of situations in which yer average each-to-their-own adherent would definitely take action to prevent something bad from happening, or from continuing. If you're one of those people and yet you'd agree with such a list, then your "philosophy" is shown to be what it really is..., Useless, of no help, invalid and really not even applicable to you. It isn't really your philosophy, so stop applying it, and stop hiding behind it.

I very strongly believe that there are very many situations where what some might refer to as tolerance is wrong. Wrong. And wrong.

This is just to remind you how very good 10,000 Things were and that you can download a lot of their music through the link to the right, or even find their album and some of the singles on iTunes.