CDR: Re: Re: why should it be trusted?

[Riad S. Wahby]

Nathan Saper <natedog at well.com> wrote:
> Yes, this was my assertion.  However, my assertion was accompanied by
> my stating that I really don't feel too sorry for the rich-ass
> Insurance Co. CEO.  If his losing a small percentage of his millions
> causes him to be as unhappy as a poor person dying slowly of cancer,
> than I guess you have an argument.  Yes, you could say that "happiness
> is subjective," and you would be right.  However, I was stating "right
> to be happy" as a generalization, not as something concrete.

This is inherently flawed.  It follows from this "right to happiness"
that the government or some other regulatory body tells people what
makes them happy and what doesn't---or, at the very least, it tells
them if their happiness is unimportant.

"Killing you, your family, and your dog shouldn't make you unhappy.
You've all had long, productive lives already.  If it does, well, too
bad."
		-- from 'The Handbook of the Ministry Of Happiness',
		   Appendix A: Handy Phrases for Public Relations

--
Riad Wahby
rsw at mit.edu
MIT VI-2/A 2002

5105
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 1304 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks-legacy/attachments/20001025/4b29ae97/attachment.sig>