>> IAN: OK, but that introduces concpets not stated
>> previously. So which, "me first" or "ulilitarianism,"
>> are you saying is deontological and which consequential?
>
>I was using an analogy; both of these philosophies are consequentialist,
>but you cannot construe utilitarianism to be egoism because of their
>important differences. Using your notation, all of U must be in M in
>order to say that they are the same philosophy.
IAN: I clearly didn't say M and U were the same
philosophy. I simply observed that they intersect:
http://www.extropy.com/exi-lists/extropians/5203.html
>As to whether the intersection of M and non-aggression (NA) is entirely
>within U, we have another thought experiment, this one orginally from
>David Friedman. Suppose you had a madman on the loose, who will kill
>hundreds of people unless you shoot him immediately. Unfortunately, you
>do not own a gun; but MY gun could be easily stolen and used to save the
>people. I am not aruond, but I have mde it explicitly clear that I want
>no one to use my gun no matter how important the cause.
>
>Utilitarianism will steal the gun and save the people, then repay the gun
>owner in whatever way possible; M U NA would not aggress against the gun
>owner.
IAN: Yes, that address the issue quite directly.
Would you say that this defines a degree of dis-
junction between L and U? We agree as per M and
U. I find that expressing ideas according to set
theory helps us "see" what we're talking about,
and thus maximizes accuracy and understanding.
**************************************************************
VISIT IAN WILLIAMS GODDARD --------> http://Ian.Goddard.net
______________________________________________________________
"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its
opponents and making them see the light, but rather because
its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows
up that is familiar with the idea from the beginning."
Max Plank - Nobel physicist
"The smallest minority on earth is the individual.
Those who deny individual rights cannot claim
to be defenders of minorities." Ayn Rand