Cool game, but i'm kind confused.
When in Intelligible realm, Doesn't someone say that we aren't suppose to find the flaws of people's arguements so much as we are suppose to find the basis of morality, or something? And then I have to go through all these guys only to find out that they're all wrong and make very little progress.
So much pointless arguments make this game boring.
I'm still on Hobbes, but i'll give my answer for morality.
Short answer: If there is a victim, it's wrong. If it doesn't affect anyone in a negative way, how could it be immoral?
Sure, an action could have a victim while at the same time help someone in a positive way. There is a fine line between right and wrong in certain situations, but that's not what the arbiter asked.
Such an easy question. Good is good and bad is bad. Duh. Morality comes from understanding our language. If it's good, it's moral. Common sense.
 "Socrates Jones: Pro Philosopher"){kind=icon}
 "The Last Stand"){kind=icon}