HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: andy.liddiard@almac.co.uk (Andy Liddiard)
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: RE: The Golden Rule
Date: 16 Dec 92 18:13:00 GMT
Reply-To: andy.liddiard@almac.co.uk (Andy Liddiard)
Organization: Almac BBS Ltd. +44 (0)324 665371


 siphon@momad.li.ny.us (Stimpson J. Katz) writes:

[...]

SJK/*Part of the Objectivist ideology is that you should treat people as rationa
SJK/*people should be treated. Not as you wish to treat them. You apparently hav
SJK/*some serious misunderstandings regarding Objectivism. (Do you confuse it
SJK/*with Hedonism?)

[...]

This makes the assumption that all people are rational. It could be
argued that, objectively, no-one is rational. I wouldn't make that
claim, but might make a third: that all people are partly rational,
partly irrational. How do I go about treating them?

"Perhaps people are, as the ancients declared, rational animals; but
if this is so, it is so only in the sense that they are uniquely
capable of reason, contemplation, and thought, not that they spend
much of their lives at it."
                        Taylor, _Metaphysics_

The ideology you state above, by induction, could state "you should
respect people for a particular ability that they all possess" (but
may not be actually using very often). If I meet a frothing lunatic
in the street wielding a chainsaw, I'm hardly going to treat him as
if he were rational. I shall be doing a runner, because he has lost
the ability to be rational. So yon bit of Objectivist ideology
fails to connect with reality (at least as I know it!).

 Andy ~ london ~ uk                        andy.liddiard@almac.co.uk
                                           notes01@clstr.pnl.ac.uk
---
 . SLMR 2.1a #112 . They built a castle on a swamp. It sank.
From: siphon@momad.li.ny.us (Stimpson J. Katz)
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: RE: The Golden Rule
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 92 01:28:26 EST
Reply-To: siphon@Momad.LI.NY.US (Stimpson J. Katz)
Organization: Modem Madness BBS    1+516-295-9435

andy.liddiard@almac.co.uk (Andy Liddiard) writes:

> 
>  siphon@momad.li.ny.us (Stimpson J. Katz) writes:
> 
> [...]
> 
> SJK/*Part of the Objectivist ideology is that you should treat people as rati
> SJK/*people should be treated. Not as you wish to treat them. You apparently 
> SJK/*some serious misunderstandings regarding Objectivism. (Do you confuse it
> SJK/*with Hedonism?)
> 
> [...]
> 
> This makes the assumption that all people are rational. It could be
> argued that, objectively, no-one is rational. I wouldn't make that
> claim, but might make a third: that all people are partly rational,
> partly irrational. How do I go about treating them?
> 
> "Perhaps people are, as the ancients declared, rational animals; but
> if this is so, it is so only in the sense that they are uniquely
> capable of reason, contemplation, and thought, not that they spend
> much of their lives at it."
>                         Taylor, _Metaphysics_
> 
> The ideology you state above, by induction, could state "you should
> respect people for a particular ability that they all possess" (but
> may not be actually using very often). If I meet a frothing lunatic
> in the street wielding a chainsaw, I'm hardly going to treat him as
> if he were rational. I shall be doing a runner, because he has lost
> the ability to be rational. So yon bit of Objectivist ideology
> fails to connect with reality (at least as I know it!).
> 

     Let me rephrase a little more precisely: Objectivism holds that
you should treat people as they deserve to be treated, rationally.
If they are irrational, treat them accordingly. If they are kind,
treat them accordingly. But one should not treat a hero in the same
manner as a criminal.

     In other words, my claim is that the RATIONAL way to treat people
is based on what treatment they objectively deserve. This must be based
on an evaluation of the individual.


Siphon@Momad.LI.NY.US
Stimpson J. Katz

     Subscribe to the Introduction to Objectivism Mailing List.
Send mail to "Server@Momad.LI.NY.US" containing the phrase
"Subscribe AYN-RAND" in the body of the message.
Xref: sparky talk.philosophy.misc:3061 alt.politics.homosexuality:8310 rec.arts.books:22982
From: dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc,alt.politics.homosexuality,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Morally good hypertext
Date: 22 Dec 92 04:13:29 GMT
Article-I.D.: spdcc.1992Dec22.041329.29225
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA

In article <Bzn5uM.55o@watserv2.uwaterloo.ca> msmorris@watsci.UWaterloo.ca (Mike Morris) writes:
>              "Next time you see a lie being spread or a bad 
>               decision being made out of sheer ignorance,
>               pause, and think of hypertext."
>                             -- K. Eric Drexler, _Engines of Creation_
>
>...I wanted to comment that this one sentence epitomizes everything that irked
>me (and still irks me) about K. Eric Drexler's book.

It worries me terribly to think that I might have to read Drexler's book
to see if it's as bad as the quote promises it to be.

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc,alt.politics.homosexuality,rec.arts.books
From: zhu@athena.mit.edu (Erin Zhu)
Subject: Fuck this thread (was Re: Morally good necessary possible sometimes possible reproductiveness)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 21:20:40 GMT

Don't you people ever get tired of following up on a thread with a
name as stupid as *that*?

In article <BzLwnL.1KF@unix.amherst.edu> jmfuchs@unix.amherst.edu
(JESSE MICHAEL FUCHS) writes:

>	Say, Erin. 

Yes, Skippy.

>You seem to know Mickey fairly well.

I'm egotistical enough to think so.  Whether I do or not tends to be
questionable at the worst times.

> In fact, you have 
>said things which give the impression that you have some sort of relationship
>with him. 

R*l*t**nsh*p, Skippy dearie, is a dangerous word, one that I hate having
applied to myself in conjunction with anyone I like, but you may use that
word if you wish.

>Being that you are in this situation, I have a few questions I want
>to ask you.

>	1. Did Mickey make you go to a doctor to get your genotype checked
>before you two engaged in any sexual relations?

No.  He took my word for it that I was (and still am) female.  Good thing
he did, too.

>	2. So far, the Mickey we have seen is a sesquipedalian weenie. 

I noticed.  He would, I believe, concur if you'd substitute "asshole"
for "weenie".

>However, I can't imagine that you go out with him on the basis of his Unix
>posting. 

Ahem.  As a matter of fact, we had the colossal misfortune of meeting
over the 'net (misfortune, as it tends to generate immediate unstoppable
giggles).  I went out with him in the beginning because I happened to
like his email and phone communications, which are rather different 
from his flame-war postings, of course.  They are nowhere as tedious,
for one thing...

>So, tell us about the other side of Mike Zeleny - the Mike Zeleny who
>like puppy dogs, 

He likes Akitas, huge Japanese dogs with a tendency to weigh more than
yours truly when fully grown.  Our apartment currently has no room
for such inhabitants, I'm afraid.

>long walks on the beach, 

long ride on a motorcycle would be more appealing.

>cuddling in front of a fireplace 
>while listening to old Barry White albums, etc. 

Ewww, puke.  C'mon, at least grant me a _little_ taste in music, 'kay?
I may not be 17 anymore, but still...

>Perhaps if Mickey was
>humanized a bit to us out in netland, these posts that are being made all
>around would be slightly less bilious.

>	So, Erin, it's up to you. Show us the warm, cuddly Mickey that melts
>your heart. 

Hey, the man's got a net.reputation to keep up, y'know? I sure ain't
about to ruin it for him.  Anyhow, I don't think a warm & fuzzy MZ
would be nearly as much fun on the 'net.  I mean, think of the loss of
such an excellent target for people to indiscriminately flame...

>Oh, and before I forget, I have one last question:

>	4. Why the heck does he direct everything to rec.arts.books? 

Ask him yourself;  you expect me to know _everything_?

>							-jesse

  --Erin
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: jmfuchs@unix.amherst.edu (JESSE MICHAEL FUCHS)
Subject: Re: Morally good necessary possible sometimes possible reproductiveness
Followup-To: talk.philosophy.misc,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.homosexuality
Organization: Amherst College
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 11:16:32 GMT

	Say, Erin. You seem to know Mickey fairly well. In fact, you have 
said things which give the impression that you have some sort of relationship
with him. Being that you are in this situation, I have a few questions I want
to ask you:
	
	1. Did Mickey make you go to a doctor to get your genotype checked
before you two engaged in any sexual relations?

	2. So far, the Mickey we have seen is a sesquipedalian weenie. 
However, I can't imagine that you go out with him on the basis of his Unix
posting. So, tell us about the other side of Mike Zeleny - the Mike Zeleny who
like puppy dogs, long walks on the beach, cuddling in front of a fireplace 
while listening to old Barry White albums, etc. Perhaps if Mickey was
humanized a bit to us out in netland, these posts that are being made all
around would be slightly less bilious.

	3. What does he do for a living, that allows him to spend so much time
on Unix without getting fired? My guess is that he works at the Harvard 
computer center, as if he were a professor or some such thing, I'm sure we
would have heard about it by now.

	So, Erin, it's up to you. Show us the warm, cuddly Mickey that melts
your heart. Oh, and before I forget, I have one last question:

	4. Why the heck does he direct everything to rec.arts.books? 

							-jesse
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc,alt.politics.homosexuality
From: mls@panix.com (Michael Siemon)
Subject: Re: Morally good hypertext
Summary:  Shirley -- not
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 23:27:05 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC

In article <1992Dec22.184128.14651@netcom.com> robj@netcom.com
(Rob Jellinghaus) writes:

>Exactly.  Netnews, insofar as it makes it easy to quote portions of
>earlier articles but hard to view the quoted article, allows only
>partial access to context.  If you could click on any quote in an
>article you're reading, and see the quote in its original context,
>imagine how many flamewars would die before even beginning....

I seriously doubt it!  How many times, when in the heat of "righteous"
indignation that leads to so many of the flames, does *anyone* bother
to read even the paragraph following in the same bloody post?  In
lots of cases, context *is* "supplied below" and available with no
more than the key to page onwards.  At other times, it may take two
or three keystrokes (a ^P for example) to track backwards -- again,
the flamer is too hot to trot out *his* outrage to bother taking even
a simple precaution to check it out, first.  [needless to say, SOME
do -- and responses get modified or deleted accordingly; this does
NOT seem to lead us to a condition of all posters attending carefully
to contexts!]
-- 
Michael L. Siemon	"We honour founders of these starving cities
mls@panix.com		 Whose honour is the image of our sorrow ...
			 They built by rivers and at night the water
			 Running past the windows comforted their sorrow."
Xref: sparky talk.philosophy.misc:3054 alt.politics.homosexuality:8270 rec.arts.books:22920
From: joan@med.unc.edu (Joan Shields)
Subject: Re: Morally good necessary possible sometimes possible reproduction
Organization: UNC-CH School of Medicine
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 22:18:01 GMT

In article <1666@emoryu1.cc.emory.edu> libwca@emory.edu (Bill Anderson) writes:
>You people ever talk about, oh, books?  Anything like that?   

Well, we could talk about books one should read during a particularly
boring round of sex?

Yours in wet fishes and alligator kisses,

Joan
From: feld@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Michael Feld)
Subject: Re: The Golden Rule
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 15:54:58 GMT

This bit of insight has two implications:

	1) that you think that those of us who disagree with you wish
-- conciously, deliberately -- to treat people unfairly, wrongfully;
	2) that you wish no one to escape whipping.

Silly stuff.
-- 
Michael Feld                  | E-mail: <feld@ccu.umanitoba.ca>
Dept. of Philosophy           | FAX: (204) 261-0021
University of Manitoba        | Voice: (204) 474-9136
Winnipeg, MB, R3T 2M8, Canada
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc,alt.politics.homosexuality,rec.arts.books
From: minsky@media.mit.edu (Marvin Minsky)
Subject: Re: Morally good hypertext
Cc: minsky
Organization: MIT Media Laboratory
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 16:25:13 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.041329.29225@spdcc.com> dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
>In article <Bzn5uM.55o@watserv2.uwaterloo.ca> msmorris@watsci.UWaterloo.ca (Mike Morris) writes:
>>              "Next time you see a lie being spread or a bad 
>>               decision being made out of sheer ignorance,
>>               pause, and think of hypertext."
>>                             -- K. Eric Drexler, _Engines of Creation_
>>
>>...I wanted to comment that this one sentence epitomizes everything that irked
>>me (and still irks me) about K. Eric Drexler's book.
>
>It worries me terribly to think that I might have to read Drexler's book
>to see if it's as bad as the quote promises it to be.
>-- 
>Steve Dyer
>dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer

Hmm.  I have a feeling that something's wrong here.  First, it is a
seminal, important book.  But this particular sentence doesn't make
sense out of context.  Drexler is expressing the hope that at some
point in the future, when you quote someone about something you will
automatically include a pointer to the portion of text that you're
quoting from -- so that a reader can effortlessly refer back to the
source!

And so, Mike Morris, in case I've got this wrong -- which is possible
because I don't have the book at hand -- would you mind repeating for
me and for Steve Dyer, a bit of the context surrounding the cited
sentence from Drexler's book.

Otherwise (if I'm right about this) this very thread may be providing
a instance of precisely what Drexler was trying to say.  If we were
using the sort of global hypertext systems that Drexler favors, the
unchecked spread of such misunderstands would not be so rapid!
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc,sci.philosophy.tech,sci.philosophy.meta
From: pmsc13sg@UMASSD.EDU (Stephen Grossman)
Subject: Re: Philosophy Departments in New England...
Reply-To: pmsc13sg@UMASSD.EDU
Organization: UMASS DARTMOUTH, NO. DARTMOUTH, MA.
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 04:34:12 GMT

In article <1992Dec29.155838.16007@viewlogic.com>, 
przemek@tokamak.viewlogic.com (Przemek Skoskiewicz) writes:
>
>I'm seriously considering graduate study in philosophy, specifically cognitive
>philosophy.  What are the recommended schools that I should check out?  Since I
>live near Boston, that area interests me the most.  Any recommendations?
>
    There are no philosophy departments in New England. 
================================================================================
	"In that world, you'll be able to rise in the morning with the spirit
you had known in your childhood: that spirit of eagerness, adventure and cer-
tainty which comes from dealing with a rational universe."
                                                              AYN RAND
================================================================================
Stephen Grossman <PMSC13SG@UMASS.EDU>
================================================================================
Xref: sparky talk.philosophy.misc:3060 rec.arts.books:22976 alt.politics.homosexuality:8304
From: arodgers@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Angus H Rodgers)
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc,rec.arts.books,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Fuck this thread (was Re: Morally good necessary possible sometimes possible reproductiveness)
Date: 21 Dec 92 22:25:09 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London

In <1992Dec21.212040.13717@athena.mit.edu>
zhu@athena.mit.edu (Erin Zhu) writes:

>[...]

>In article <BzLwnL.1KF@unix.amherst.edu> jmfuchs@unix.amherst.edu
>(JESSE MICHAEL FUCHS) writes:

>>	Say, Erin. 

>Yes, Skippy.

>>You seem to know Mickey fairly well.

>>[...]

>>However, I can't imagine that you go out with him on the basis of his Unix
>>posting. 

>>[...]

>>Perhaps if Mickey was
>>humanized a bit to us out in netland, these posts that are being made all
>>around would be slightly less bilious.

>>	So, Erin, it's up to you. Show us the warm, cuddly Mickey that melts
>>your heart. 

>Hey, the man's got a net.reputation to keep up, y'know? 

Something like Darth Vader, isn't it?

Does he take the suit off in bed? :-)

Anyway, thanks, Erin: this post of yours has made my day. Really! I 
just keep re-reading it, and a daft smile keeps creeping over my face.
It works every time.

Is anyone ever going to produce a "Best of Usenet" book? This should
be in it.

(Or failing that, "The Collected Flames of Michael Zeleny", Vols. 
I - XXVIII, would keep us addicts happy.)

Ha ha ha

   HA

ha ha ha ha ha

   HA HA

[dies laughing]
--
Gus Rodgers,  Dept. of Computer Science, |  [Profound thought for 1993]
Queen Mary & Westfield College, Mile End |     "Philishave is about
Road, London, England.   +44 71 975 5241 |      personal choice" 
E-mail (JANET):   arodgers@dcs.qmw.ac.uk |             -- TV advert
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc,sci.philosophy.tech,sci.philosophy.meta
From: przemek@tokamak.viewlogic.com (Przemek Skoskiewicz)
Subject: Philosophy Departments in New England...
Originator: przemek@tokamak
Organization: Viewlogic Systems, Inc.
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 15:58:38 GMT


I'm seriously considering graduate study in philosophy, specifically cognitive
philosophy.  What are the recommended schools that I should check out?  Since I
live near Boston, that area interests me the most.  Any recommendations?

I know that I have to do plenty of research into this myself--I'm looking for
places to start.  Much obliged.


-- 
Viewlogic Systems, Inc.                         Przemek Skoskiewicz
293 Boston Post Road West
Marlborough, MA 01752-4615, USA
email: przemek@viewlogic.com
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc
From: maria@cs.ruu.nl (Maria Ferreira)
Subject: Re: Arab preservation of "european" thought
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 10:32:40 GMT
Organization: Utrecht University, Dept. of Computer Science

In <1980@spam.ua.oz> jaskew@spam.ua.oz (Joseph Askew) writes:

... lots of things deleted...
>
>Nor did the Europeans conquer Iberia - they LIBERATED it. You know like
>Palestine might one day be liberated from the foreigners who have come
>and stolen the land from the rightful owners killing thousands of them.
>(spot the sarcasm)
>
>The Arabs played little or no part in Western Civilisation. What part
>they did play was mostly as intermediaries - bring paper to Europe from
>China for instance. You can see this by listing the number of European
>scholars who felt the need to learn Arabic.     That's about all of them.
>
>
>Joseph Askew
>
>
>-- 
>Joseph Askew, Gauche and Proud  Barbarian horns draw out the northern wind;
>jaskew@spam.maths.adelaide.edu  Paler than water lies the Thistle Pass;
>Disclaimer? Sue, see if I care  Sky swallows up the road to Kokonor;
>One China One Korea One Eire32  Moonlight, a thousand miles along the Wall.



I don't have time nor references here to discuss/contest all your other 
statements but for somebody coming from Iberia that was too much to take. The 
europeans "liberated" Iberia? To start with the arabs living in Portugal/Spain
were *ALSO* europeans, or is it that you consider europeans only the northern 
barbarians with blue eyes and blond hair? Furthermore we had invasions from 
about everywhere and anybody (we still do mostly every summer... )as Urnfield 
expansion (Bronze Age), the Celtic invasion (2650 B.C.- 1425 B.C.), the 
Phonecians (9th century), the Greeks (sixth-century) and the Carthaginians 
(5th century) traders..; the Romans to whom the the Carthaginians lost the 
Iberian peninsula in the Second Punic War.  Finally the Arabs came in 711 AD 
and by that time part of the peninsula was occupated by Goths again not native
to the peninsula. So as you can see stating that "europeans liberated Iberia"
is, to say the least, a very gross mistake.
As far as culture or better yet civilization is concerned, the Arabs were 
clearly superior to the rest of the people in Europe (including Iberia) with the
exception perhaps of the Byzantine Empire. They had a very refined civilization 
and their (good) influence (in Iberia)  ranges from gastronomy to architecture
not forgetting mathematics, agriculture, irrigation tecniques, etc. 

You say also
The Arabs played little or no part in Western Civilisation....

To make it short where do you think the word algebra comes from? And 
algorithm? And yes, as other people mentioned in their posts, the works of
Aristotle survived mostly thanks to the Arabs.
Without meaning any offence, I think that your knowledge of the arab influence 
in western world and Europe in particular needs either a good refreshing of 
memory or a far deeper study. 

Regards

Maria
From: "bob garfield" <bob.garfield@execnet.com>
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: zeleny assumptions
Date: 26 Dec 92 03:52:29 EST
Reply-To: "bob garfield" <bob.garfield@execnet.com>
Distribution: talk
Organization: Executive Networks Information

MZ:
>To reiterate some of my assumptions, I take it that rational discourse,
>in particular rational moral discourse, is both possible and desirable,
>and so take human freedom of choice and rationality as its logical
>prerequisites. I take it that absolute moral principles bind all
>rational agents in accordance with their fundamental nature, and
>regardless of their particular goals or circumstances.  I take it that
>rationality, sexuality, and mortality belong to the fundamental nature
>of human beings, and accordingly are possessed of a moral dimension.
>The rest is commentary.


I take it that irritability, digestion, and acne belong to the
fundamental nature of human beings.

I DO NOT accordingly assign to these facta a moral dimension, nor do
I believe you have any more justification for doing so for your more
esteemed and sexier trilogy of 'human nature fundaments'.

In fact, man's biological condition is nothing more than a background,
a stage setting, in which and with which, for better or worse, he is
compelled to work out his aspirations. These aspirations derive from
man's non-natural 'being,' and are at root not a matter of ration-
ality at all, but are primarily affairs of the heart. The rational
ideal itself is but one of these aspirations, invented one fine day
2700 years ago in Elea, and enchanted segments of humanity ever since.

While a deduction of moral absolutes logically deriveable from a firm
and knowable human nature would be 'neat', and greatly simplify the
problems of individual and collective existence, the immense weight of
history mitigates strongly against such an optimistic view. Much greater
heads than mine, or even yours, have always come up short. The delicate
web of moral discourse may be better traversed on the wings of poetry
than in the boots of logic.

rcg
---
  SLMR 2.1  
--
Executive Network Information System  (914) 667-4567
International ILink Host
Xref: sparky talk.philosophy.misc:3070 alt.politics.homosexuality:8365 rec.arts.books:23047