Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (60094)	9/27/2002 4:02:25 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 82486

Anyone who is markedly affected by your behavior has at least some claim to an apology if discommoded by what you have done, and an explanation if you think you are justified. You keep on making this assertion. But asserting something multiple times doesn't make it any truer than it was the first time. You just keep saying the same thing over and over, in slightly different words but still the same thing. I want to know WHY you think this to be true. Why do I have any obligation whatsoever to justify, explain, or try to defend my moral decisions to any other person or group of people? I may choose to do so. But why do you think that is not a choice but an obligation?

To: Neocon who wrote (60094)	9/27/2002 4:05:58 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

The expression "never explain, never apologize" has been attributed variously to Disrali, Evelyn Waugh, Benjamin Jowett, and perhaps others. You seem to reject this principle. Why?