One can very well use it as an argument for why somebody else should or should not do something. e.g: One should not throw a hard-disk at Linus Torvalds because they might hurt him and that's just wrong...
One can very well use it as an argument for why somebody else should or should not do something. e.g: One should not throw a hard-disk at Linus Torvalds because they might hurt him and that's just wrong...
If you're talking about the fact that every culture has notions of right and wrong, yeah sure.
If you're saying that what is right and what is wrong is universal and not cultural ... Well where to begin
Some of thoses traits are shared amongst most cultures (Murder is wrong, incest is wrong), but even there there are exceptions (ritual murder ?). For anything more complicated than that, this position is simply impossible to hold.
Most precisely, about property, intellectual or physical, and things like profit, the sense of right and wrong varies so wildly amongst cultures that i can't really think you're making this argument seriously.
And even if it does vary wildly in current cultures, there is such a thing as a sense of morals that we can combine with rational thought to reach a fair solution. The fact that culture A considers ritual murder ok fails this morals + rational though test.
That sounds a lot like most theology I've heard, and I suspect that the HN crowd is not one that puts a whole lot of stock in theology.