[It's THIS AGAIN. It's like that argument over the value of art without an audience and how the audience's inherent consumption begets commercial value. They never settled that either.]
I never disagreed that he held a viewpoint of ethical responsibility, but you insisted on an interpretation that a good purpose was one that was morally righteous. However, that means nothing if the wealth is spent on a purpose that provides no practical good.
no subject
I never disagreed that he held a viewpoint of ethical responsibility, but you insisted on an interpretation that a good purpose was one that was morally righteous. However, that means nothing if the wealth is spent on a purpose that provides no practical good.