>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: I believe that we could say that L (libertarianism)
is the intersection of U (utilitarianism) and M (me first),
as such (using squares to define sets rather than circles):
______
U | ___|___
| | | | M
| | L | |
| | | |
| ----|----
--------
Some of M is outside L and U, and some of U is out-
side L, as you note above. So I think this is it. ?
**************************************************************
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