Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 30 Aug 2002 23:17:51 -0700
From:      Dave Hayes <dave@jetcafe.org>
To:        Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
Cc:        "Neal E. Westfall" <nwestfal@directvinternet.com>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Why did evolution fail? 
Message-ID:  <200208310617.g7V6Hu128152@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> writes:
> You may say some activity (e.g. killing another human being) is
> "not right".  What you really mean is "it's unethical"; to borrow
> from Dave Hayes, you are actually saying that it would violate
> your internal code of conduct.  What this actually means, however,
> is that you will not tolerate it in yourself, and so you will also
> not tolerate it in others.

This is where we disagree. 

I claim you should not worry about what others do, your focus should
be on what YOU do, and that will maximize gain for you and (somewhat)
society. You appear to claim that we have to focus on what OTHERS do
and controlling them achieves more gain for you and society.

> My own objection to this is, first and foremost, that the rights
> of the state take precedence of the rights of the individual, as
> the state is composed of individuals, and the yardstick we must
> therefore use is that of the greatest good for the greatest number.

I claim you can't know that yardstick. 

> I personally believe that Dave is intentionally ignoring the fact
> that membership in nominally open online societies is by way of
> self-selection.  

It's irrelavent, yes. 

> The reason this is amusing is that he attempted to create a forum
> in which his principles were also embodied in the nature of the
> forum itself, and it failed.  The failure arose from people who
> attacked it... and which Dave has so far failed to recognize as
> "trolls", in the same sense that he is asking everyone else to
> accept, when he could not.

It wasn't intended to succeed or fail, actually. It was intended to
demonstrate. What I failed to realize was that, for a demonstration to
be effective, it must fall on fertile eyes and ears. 
------
Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - dave@jetcafe.org 
>>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<<

Objects are defined subjectively. Since objects are defined
arbitrarily, this gives rise to your arbitrary subjectivity.




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200208310617.g7V6Hu128152>