I should get off the promises (part 2)

*****************************
Aisde to "Rebecca" from yesterday's post. Kick it!!! here to find out if she is going to be in your area in the very near (tomorrow night) future.
*****************************
Feeling somewhere between Nostalgia Sickness and Wanderlust today. Must be the weather.

I was going to do an update on my continued peeking into Ideal Code but I was waylaid by some highwaymen (or some extra work at work) and didn't get into the book again like I had planned... ahh plans. What a waste.

Anyway. What's been bothering me about the methodology of Mr. Hooker is the assumption that an ethical code somehow adheres to our already in place ethical code. To me it stinks tautological but I can't quite figure where the source is.

I would like to get #2 (heh heh... stink, number two) out of the way. I have no problems with a theory or system being internally consistent. So I'll grant him that assumption, for now. (I reserve the right to retract that allowance.)

I feel like one and three are coming from the same starting point, which is to say, attractive generalizations about morality and an adherance to our existing moral convictions after careful consideration come from the same yet unidentified base of moral convictions that we (whatever sort of group "we" is) seem to have intuitively. So far, Mr. Hooker either hasn't explained why these assumptions should be granted or I've missed his explanation as to why my general feelings about ethical actions are in some way universal for all people.

So that's what I'm kicking around in my head right now. If I can't find some sort of resolution, I may just have to grant the assumptions (for the sake of moving forward) and ... enough with the fucking smoking, Asshole! I'm tired of your lack of consideration on that point ... sorry, where was I? Nevermind. I'm going to step outside to get away from the bad air.