
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 19:28:00 -0500, Bob LeChevalier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Capitalist Pig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 13:43:46 -0500, Bob LeChevalier >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>Absolutely. My emotions render me superior to a machine. >> >>Isn't it funny the Universe had to wait billions of years to reach a >>stage where biological machines would be able to think clearly about >>itself, for those machines to decide to act like any other animal >>instead? > >Human beings cannot think clearly about themselves. They are biased >by self-interest. > Now you only need to demonstrate that somehow this bias of yours renders you superior to a machine. But I digress. > >>The principle I start with, and one I am not willing to reject, is >>that individuals own themselves. > >I don't accept that axiom, and indeed find it morally questionable >that the concept of ownership should apply to human beings at all. >Hence your philosophy is utterly worthless to me. > Ownership means having control over. By self-ownership, an individual is able to claim full control over him or herself (and strictly him or herself). Why do you find this questionable? > >I agree that it should be illegal (or taxed 100%, which would >accomplish the same purpose and reduce the deficit), but I suspect >that you misstated. > You got that one right.
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |