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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (175072)	11/16/2005 9:49:55 AM
From: Mary Cluney	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The correct answer, IMO, is that the ends are never certain, but when you embark upon your means, the die is cast, and certain, as far as your means goes- so the ends (in a world where we are not psychic) do not justify the means. You better be able to live with the means you employ, on their own, because ends are uncertain. You missed my main point. That is, the language(s) that we use is/are primitive and can not accurately answer the question(s) that you think you are answering. Without trying to pick on you specifically, but analyze the thought in the first sentence that you wrote: <<<the ends are never certain>>> I know what you mean - and in that way, you may be correct. <<<but when you embark upon your means, the die is cast, and certain, as far as your means goes- >>> There again I know what you mean but it can be read in many ways and the validity can be endlessly argued without real resolution. The world is complex. Even here in this one simple sentence, I don't think you can come up with a conclusion that you could stake your life on. It is not your fault. Language is failing us. We can only do with it the best that we can. It is not clear enough. It is not accurate enough to convey what you would hope to be some kind of truth that would apply over many different situations if not over a long period of time.