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: The Philosopher who wrote (60098)	9/27/2002 4:26:46 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

I don't understand where the claim comes from. Social contract? Divine Right? where?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (60098)	9/27/2002 4:36:35 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

If you cannot see my point from the examples I gave, then I am really not sure what to say to you. I can hardly fathom someone who thinks he owes no one an explanation. It is like breaking the bonds of trust which hold society together. Answering for oneself says that one cares what others think, and that one will try to either make amends or justify oneself to show that one is still worthy of trust.......

To: The Philosopher who wrote (60098)	9/27/2002 4:37:21 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"But why do you think that is not a choice but an obligation?" IMO, it is an essential element of effective human being. It is an innate aspect of our humanity. To deny an accounting to another human being who has been left wanting as a result of social action, causes a ping of conscience for the actor. It is an obligation as well as a choice. Do withhold accountability as if no obligation exists is a choice that comes with some need to internally justify that position as well. Its an, I'm not going to tell them why I rebelled because... So either act the act of providing or with holding are two sides of the same coin of humanity as evidenced by the fact that you consciously do one or the other.

To: The Philosopher who wrote (60098)	9/27/2002 4:55:14 PM
From: E	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 82486

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? I would feel comfortable calling that (and related behaviors) a choice, in the sense that you may choose to behave ferally if this behavior feels 'right' to you; and I'd call it fair for others to observe this behavior, gather that you are a feral, or sociopathic individual, and behave accordingly where you are concerned. Feral creatures are not trusted by ordinary ones, and should hardly be surprised at this, I should think. They will have like creatures to associate with when it suits each of their needs, but trust and the ordinary affections of ordinary creatures will not be theirs. They will, of course, care little, being feral creatures.