home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!pipex!bnr.co.uk!uknet!almac!andy.liddiard
- From: andy.liddiard@almac.co.uk (Andy Liddiard)
- Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc
- Subject: RE: The Golden Rule
- Message-ID: <490.1415.uupcb@almac.co.uk>
- 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
- Lines: 36
-
-
- 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.
-
-