Re: [Re: Microsoft Trial Judge Based His Break-Up "Remedy" On Flawed Theory, Not Facts]
It's all in the timing.
If the censors are the last to judge,
they self proclaim the right to punish
or take corrective action.
So justice is held in a pyramid scheme
where those not fortunate or not able to be
on top are by definition the only liable to
be judged by terrestrial powers.
The odd thing about this is judgments
are punitive in nature, so those at the bottom
slip further down; distancing the judging party
from the judged. Kind of a reinforcing cycle.
Can you think of mechanisms to trigger this cycle Jim?
Jim Choate
On 27 Feb 2001, LUIS VILDOSOLA wrote:
Your last paragraph is a little too complicated for me Jim, I'm interested in what you have to say but please break it down for me.
Somebody does something. As a consequence another party is considered to have contributed to the first persons act, without actually participating in the act.
So, if the first person is not fully responsible, why is the second party fully responsible? How do you test this?
If a party whose actions contribute is responsible for the consequences then isn't the censor themselves, since they take an active role, also responsible?
Doesn't this put a party in the defence in the role of presecutor and judge? That seems to be a considerable conflict of interest.
____________________________________________________________________
Before a larger group can see the virtue of an idea, a smaller group must first understand it.
"Stranger Suns" George Zebrowski
The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________________________ Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1
On 28 Feb 2001, LUIS VILDOSOLA wrote:
It's all in the timing.
Right and wrong have timing? I think not.
If the censors are the last to judge,
Censors are the first to judge. 'a priori' effectively means 'before'.
they self proclaim the right to punish or take corrective action.
What censor ever took a self-proclaimed right to censor and actually got away with it? You cast censorship as if it were a private/personal act when in fact it's a societal act, many against one. If it's couched in anything it's a mis-applied concept of self-defence.
So justice is held in a pyramid scheme where those not fortunate or not able to be on top are by definition the only liable to be judged by terrestrial powers.
That's not justice, that human nature. Don't have a clue how we got into talking about space aliens (ie terrestrial powers). Are you mean transcendental as in religious?
The odd thing about this is judgments are punitive in nature, so those at the bottom slip further down; distancing the judging party from the judged. Kind of a reinforcing cycle.
????
Can you think of mechanisms to trigger this cycle Jim?
I'm not sure what 'cycle' you mean. ____________________________________________________________________ Before a larger group can see the virtue of an idea, a smaller group must first understand it. "Stranger Suns" George Zebrowski The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
participants (2)
-
Jim Choate -
LUIS VILDOSOLA