On Wed, Aug 14, 2002, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote about "Re: Essay about Free Software - in Hebrew": > "Nadav Har'El" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I view the law as an approximation of Kant's Categorical Imperative - > > which means roughly (for people who are not familiar with Kant's theory) > > that if you want certain ethical rules to apply toward you (e.g., I should > > not be killed!) you must make them a rule to be applied by everyone toward > > everyone. > > Can we declare philosophy off-topic here once and for all? The above > is empirically wrong, by the way: "I should not be killed" all too > often implies "I should kill others", and it's perfectly ethical by > any (sane) definition...
If you want to declare philosophy arguments on this list off-topic, why are you starting one??? And my 2-line comment wasn't meant as a complete introduction to Kant. Please don't disparage his ideas just because you don't understand the way I tried to explain them. -- Nadav Har'El | Wednesday, Aug 14 2002, 6 Elul 5762 [EMAIL PROTECTED] |----------------------------------------- Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |I work for money. If you want loyalty, http://nadav.harel.org.il |buy yourself a dog. ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
