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: one_less who wrote (73642)	8/29/2003 2:22:36 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Ends do justify means, as long as proportionality is maintained, and as long as the ends pursued are likely to succeed. If a gunmen drew on my son, I would be justified in shooting the guy down to save my son. If my son were starving, I would be justified in stealing a loaf of bread. Few people would consider it noble to let a child die in order not to get one's hand dirty........

To: one_less who wrote (73642)	8/29/2003 4:47:06 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

We are now faced with the usual limitations we have with language. “Truth” in the context I have been using it is a commitment to seeking, honoring, and presenting facts with sincerity of action, character, and utterance in the context of trust with one's self, one’s fellows, and society at large. Deception against an enemy? There is a poorly understood, or misunderstood, contradiction of terms here. The basis for being truthful is bound to a foundation of trust. In a court proceeding, the defendant, especially if a poor minority, often has no relationship of trust with the judicial system or society at large. So by your definition, they are perfectly entitled to lie, or in your phrase "to match wits outside the parameters of truth."