A cheap shot it may be, but I don't understand it.
Could you explain?
>Further, the intentional equivocation of "holding a
>moral judgement" and "clinging to a moral judgement", suggesting some
>sort of desperation or irrational obstinacy on the part of the holder,
>reveals more about the biases of the author...
Umm, maybe not enough about my biases is evident here.
I'm a Buddhist, and "clinging" has a special significance
to me. Looked at from a certain point of view, just about
all that's wrong with the world can be put down to people
clinging to some things and evading others -- and the
latter is just the former, inverted. And I certainly still
cling, even though I tend to take this sort of view.
Clinging is just about ubiquitous, actually, so to accuse
anyone of it, is practically tantamount to saying "you're
not perfect!" Not such a heavy put-down.
>...who, seeming to believe that
>all moral judgements are delusions, must have a hard time controlling
>that ubiquitous impulse to reach across the counter and choke the
>clueless retail clerk...
You haven't considered the possibility that there's an
alternative to moral judgement, to guide our actions.
Buddhism advocates compassion, not because it's moral,
or proper, or because God/Buddha says so, but because
it minimises suffering, which is precisely what we all
want anyway. With sufficient practicality of that sort
there's no need for morality, whatsoever.
Metta,
-- Robin