~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Tue, 5 Nov 1996 hallam@ai.mit.edu wrote:
...as Mills observes [rights] are a product of law. Society finds it necessary to enact laws to protect rights...
I responded:
Logically, you can't have it both ways. Which is it?
To which Phill alleged:
Both sentences say the same thing. Society enacts laws which provide protections to the individual. As a result of these protections the individual has rights.
Unfortunately, both sentences, as originally written, DO NOT say the same thing. They are recursive in the extreme. "Society enacts laws which provide protections to the individual" is not the logical equivalent of "Society finds it necessary to enact laws to protect rights" unless rights exist prior to the enactment of laws. Maybe Phill should just say he misspoke himself rather then go through his elaborate back-and-fill charade. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~