Theos-Talk Archives (August 1994 Message tl00159)

To Jerry S.

I find it amusing and ironical that while giving ethics
and morals (society's version of right and wrong) so
little value, you on the other hand, depend so dearly
upon the meanings of words given to us by the
institution we call the common dictionary. Are you not
being selective about which outer groups you give al-
legiance to, when it is convenient for you to do so.
This may be your Achilles' heel...

Jerry S says: <(unless, of course, I have to provide some
further definitions from my trusty dictionary - but
that only!)>

Has Webster's New World Dictionary of the American
Language, explained or corrected their use of the term
American Language yet?  I wasn't aware that there was
an American Language. Could those who YOU have trust in
possibly be wrong?  If whole societies of religions and
governments can be WRONG in their inclination to provide
rules and laws, why cannot the compilers of Webster's
Dictionary be WRONG in their attempt to solidify the
meanings of society's vocabulary?  Actually, according
to the editors of the WD, they have no intention of put-
ing words or people in strait jackets. Here is a
quote from their foreword: "This dictionary was not to
create the impression that it was authoritarian, laying
down the law about usage; it was to play, rather, the
role of a friendly guide, pointing out the safe, well
traveled roads."

I'm sure there is more to ethics/morals than what
scholars, specialists and editorial persons reveal to
us within the space of an inch. At this point of the
operation it might be interesting to call in one of our
own specialists, April H-E, who claims to be a teacher
of ethics and is a Theosophist. I'm hoping that she will
give us a more lengthy definition of these controversial
words; ethics, morals, so we can rally around something
with more substance.

Jerry says: <After this, anyone who still cares to
worry over ethics and concern themselves with good or
bad conduct...etc......>

Actually Jerry S, there are some individuals, perhaps
not you, that do have to worry over ethics, and do have
to concern themselves with right and wrong. Just look at
the Menendez boys for an extreme example of those
who could have benefited from a sensitivity to regu-
lating codes of ethics/morals, which in reality should
be seen in their true role as the "friendly guide to
the safe, well traveled road."  In conclusion, consider
this thought, that not all feelings of restraint are
inflicted upon us from without; from religious indoctri-
nating taboos and socially agreed upon laws. We do have
an inner voice/conscience ready like Jiminy Cricket to
guide us in a friendly manner toward that safe and well
traveled road........................Sarah.