Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2002 05:20:57 -0700 From: Dave Hayes <dave@jetcafe.org> To: "Neal E. Westfall" <nwestfal@directvinternet.com> Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why did evolution fail? Message-ID: <200209041221.g84CL2183082@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Neal E Westfall <nwestfal@directvinternet.com> writes: > On Fri, 30 Aug 2002, Dave Hayes wrote: >> 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. > > But aren't you contradicting yourself? Hopefully. ;) > Your admonition that people *should not* worry about what others do > is itself a violation of your principle. It is impossible to live > in a community without imposing your views on other people, even if > it is as innocuous as "don't worry about what others do". Nonsense. There is a difference between "imposing" and "sharing". The idea is to hone your own personal judgement by realizing that the important focii are self-directed (this does not mean selfish behavior, it means introspection), and that will help determine how you deal with others. You can still share viewpoints, argue, debate, poke fun at, and all that stuff...as long as you remain focused on your own reactions and motivations. This road leads to sincerity, which leads...farther on. > Why cannot one's internal views include trying to convince others to > adopt the same views, which is, after all, what you are trying to > do. Maybe I should stop responding then. I'm not really trying to convince here. I'm responding to words I see on the screen with my words. If someone learns something from them, great. If they completely disagree and tear them apart, great. I don't sit here with a scoreboard and check em off when I've indoctrinated them. ;) >> > 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. > > You are right. Given his worldview, he cannot. On the other hand, > given your worldview, you cannot know the yardstick "do not worry > about what others do" is correct either. It is correct for me. I feel it is correct for most people reading internet text, but if those people don't feel like I do, there's not a damn difference any of my words will (or should) make. ------ Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - dave@jetcafe.org >>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<< If you ever drop your keys into a river of molten lava, let'em go, because, man, they're gone. 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?200209041221.g84CL2183082>