Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

"Objective Law", Morality, Ethos and Ethics

Expand Messages
  • Shlomi Fish
    I agree that most people think that legal is what the State defines as legal. According to this definition killing Jews in Nazis Germany was legal. However,
    Message 1 of 6 , Apr 12 11:26 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      I agree that most people think that legal is what the State defines as
      legal. According to this definition killing Jews in Nazis Germany was
      legal. However, Law is a philosophical term that is not necessarily
      enforced by a country. Many philosophers devised their own law systems
      that may deviate from what exists now in any country.

      "Objective Law" is basically such a law system that is devisable from:

      1. Logic.
      2. Reason. (I.e: reaching conclusions)
      3. The biological nature of men and women. (I.e: the base for the
      deduction)

      Let's not discuss what it is exactly for the time being. That's not
      relevant. What is relevant is that it can easily be deduced by any person
      of any culture and any time.

      If I travel to Africa, approach a Massai hunter, and tell him about what
      Stalin did to his own people or Hitler did to the Jews. I believe he will
      immediately agree that those people were incredibly destructive. Just
      according to the basic facts.

      Have anybody of you read "Homesteading the Noosphere" by Eric Raymond?
      Raymond says there that cultures all across the world have developed
      similar laws to the Lockean Property Laws. (and I'll be the last person to
      say a bad word about John Locke) Eric Raymond's papers are usually very
      well researched and knowledgable, so I see no reason not to believe him.

      So I say that Objective Law exists. And there are some ground rules that
      are accepted by everybody, regardless of their way of life.

      Now Morality. Morality is entirely different than law. I define Morality
      as the best strategy I can take to lead a prosperous life. Some define it
      as the best strategy to have a peace of mind. Either way, it's purely
      something that applies to the individum and not to the community in
      general.

      What exactly is Morality really is a different question. Now, getting
      very fat may be immoral because you'll risk many diseases, and people will
      disrespect you. Also, having homosexual intercourse may be immoral because
      its biologically unnatural and can reduce one's self-esteem. (let's not
      start a flame-war here). Should either of these things be illegal
      (State-wise)? I can enlist many "immoral" actions that should be of no
      concern to society in general: viewing porn sites, discrimination,
      swearing, taking a day off, procrastinating, smoking/drinking/taking
      narcotics, etc. etc.

      My point is that the Government should not even attempt to enforce
      Morality because there isn't a need. No one will get harmed if I read porn
      magazines. Seriously. No one will get harm if I reverse-engineer a driver
      and make it work with the OS of my choice. No one will get harmed if I
      tell people about a future plan of a company I work for. (so called
      "internal information" in the U.S.).

      Let's leave discrimination for a while. I think that in most cases, it is
      immoral but must not be illegal. However, my point is that the government
      should enforce Law, and not even consider enforcing Morality. I would very
      much like to live in a country where everybody is lawful (objectively) and
      the country is prosperous and safe and yet everybody is reading porn
      magazines. Some Christian Priests and Ministers would consider such a
      scenario as very "immoral" and would call for a law banning porn
      magazines. But this will only create a huge black market of porn magazines
      and make people feel guilty of doing something that is perfectly
      legitimate for them to do. Thus, destorying paradise in an attempt to save
      it.

      The problem is that for any given action, there will be a few people
      who'll consider it immoral:

      <<<
      There is no opinion so absurd that some philosopher will not express it.
      -- Marcus Tullius Cicero, "Ad familiares"
      >>>

      (ripped out of the Linux fortune collection)

      We should not try to enforce Morality because a country with a proper
      government and private and public forces that enforce Objective Law and
      that alone, will forever prosper and become more and more moral and
      enlightened in time. Moral degredation? I have yet to see it happening
      en-masse in a free country.

      Some people have considered the Beatles as a moral derusion, and those
      that avoided the Vietnam war as criminals, etc. Nowadays, they are
      acknowledged to be a large part of American culture, and few people
      completely dismiss them as immoral.

      Now Ethics is the art and science of objective law and morality. Trying to
      enforce "morality" is unethical. Of course, killing innocent people is
      immoral as well as illegal and that should be enforced. I do not deny
      that. But most immoral actions that are practiced by the individual and
      are of no threat to society should not be enforced.

      I have many faults. I am often tact-less, pick my nose, forget things, am
      sometimes disorganized, have awful hand-writing usually, have trouble
      giving speeches assertively, am recessive, etc. I'm not ashamed of any of
      them. And they are all things I'd like to improve. But I would not like to
      see a law passed that prohibits people from giving bad lectures.

      Regards,

      Shlomi Fish

      P.S: I keep giving porn magazines as an example of an immoral action. For
      the record, I don't think reading pornographic magazines is immoral, if it
      makes you feel good. Refer to the old discussion about Playboy in
      Hackers-IL. Some people are positively disgusted by most of the porn
      magazines nowadays, if not all, and that's OK as well.



      ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      Shlomi Fish shlomif@...
      Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/

      My opinions may seem crazy, but they all make sense. Insane sense, but
      sense nonetheless.
    • Shlomi Fish
      Since we are in a quotation war, here is a nice quote:
      Message 2 of 6 , Apr 14 9:51 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Since we are in a quotation war, here is a nice quote:

        <<<
        Perfection is achieved not when you have nothing more to add,
        but when you have nothing left to take away.

        Antoine de Saint-Exupery
        >>>

        For those who don't remember de Saint-Exupery wrote the Little Prince.

        Now apply this to a country's canon and you'll get what I'll be saying all
        along. There is no point in adding redundant laws or such that attempt to
        fix symptoms of other problems in the law or "immoralities". You should
        keep the law book as minimalistic as possible.

        Regards,

        Shlomi Fish





        ----------------------------------------------------------------------
        Shlomi Fish shlomif@...
        Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/

        An apple a day will keep a doctor away. Two apples a day will keep two
        doctors away.

        Falk Fish
      • Nadav Har'El
        ... A minimalistic law would not say that stealing is illegal, or that going into a street where a circular red sign with a white stripe on it is illegal.
        Message 3 of 6 , Apr 15 12:47 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          On Tue, Apr 15, 2003, Shlomi Fish wrote about "Re: "Objective Law", Morality, Ethos and Ethics":
          > along. There is no point in adding redundant laws or such that attempt to
          > fix symptoms of other problems in the law or "immoralities". You should
          > keep the law book as minimalistic as possible.

          A "minimalistic" law would not say that stealing is illegal, or that going
          into a street where a circular red sign with a white stripe on it is illegal.
          But you cannot run a country without such "mudane" laws...

          It's the same as a computer program - it's nice for a computer program to
          be lean and not contain millions of lines of code - but you cannot escape
          the fact that in order to have more features and to support more situtation,
          your program will need to grow. It shouldn't bloat, and it shouldn't be
          written to cater for irrelevant situtations, but it can still grow.

          --
          Nadav Har'El | Tuesday, Apr 15 2003, 13 Nisan 5763
          nyh@... |-----------------------------------------
          Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |Give Yogi a rifle. Support your right to
          http://nadav.harel.org.il |arm bears!
        • Shlomi Fish
          ... Actually, a minimalistic lawbook would say such things. Take a look at the Neo-Tech Constitution: http://www.neo-tech.com/advantages/advantage83.html It
          Message 4 of 6 , Apr 15 9:58 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            On Tue, 15 Apr 2003, Nadav Har'El wrote:

            > On Tue, Apr 15, 2003, Shlomi Fish wrote about "Re: "Objective Law", Morality, Ethos and Ethics":
            > > along. There is no point in adding redundant laws or such that attempt to
            > > fix symptoms of other problems in the law or "immoralities". You should
            > > keep the law book as minimalistic as possible.
            >
            > A "minimalistic" law would not say that stealing is illegal, or that going
            > into a street where a circular red sign with a white stripe on it is illegal.
            > But you cannot run a country without such "mudane" laws...
            >

            Actually, a minimalistic lawbook would say such things. Take a look at the
            Neo-Tech Constitution:

            http://www.neo-tech.com/advantages/advantage83.html

            It reads:

            <<<
            No person, group of persons, or government may initiate force, threat of
            force, or fraud against the person or property of any individual.
            >>>

            Read _property_. A law that prohibits stealing is important to protect
            that.

            > It's the same as a computer program - it's nice for a computer program to
            > be lean and not contain millions of lines of code - but you cannot escape
            > the fact that in order to have more features and to support more situtation,
            > your program will need to grow. It shouldn't bloat, and it shouldn't be
            > written to cater for irrelevant situtations, but it can still grow.
            >

            Granted. But the law books of most countries are very much bloated. Way
            too much bloated. And many times they reflect the interests of the
            government, various politicians and interest groups more than they reflect
            that of objective Ethics.

            While I support adding features to program, I don't want an editor to turn
            into an operating system.

            Regards,

            Shlomi Fish

            >



            ----------------------------------------------------------------------
            Shlomi Fish shlomif@...
            Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/

            An apple a day will keep a doctor away. Two apples a day will keep two
            doctors away.

            Falk Fish
          • Omer Musaev
            -- Omer Mussaev Software Engineer, EMS team, APM R&D Mercury Interactive ... From: Shlomi Fish [mailto:shlomif@vipe.stud.technion.ac.il] Sent: Wednesday, April
            Message 5 of 6 , Apr 16 12:07 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              --
              Omer Mussaev
              Software Engineer, EMS team, APM R&D
              Mercury Interactive

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Shlomi Fish [mailto:shlomif@...]
              Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 7:58 AM
              To: philosophy-il@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: "Objective Law", Morality, Ethos and Ethics

              > On Tue, 15 Apr 2003, Nadav Har'El wrote:

              >> It's the same as a computer program - it's nice for a computer program to
              >> be lean and not contain millions of lines of code - but you cannot escape
              >> the fact that in order to have more features and to support more
              situtation,
              >> your program will need to grow. It shouldn't bloat, and it shouldn't be
              >> written to cater for irrelevant situtations, but it can still grow.
              >>

              > Granted. But the law books of most countries are very much bloated. Way
              > too much bloated. And many times they reflect the interests of the
              > government, various politicians and interest groups more than they reflect
              > that of objective Ethics.

              Some people do not get C++. Ever. They just bubble about bloated language,
              and overcomplicated rules, and such and such and such. Other people just
              frown upon the constants in the complexity calculations. Once you had
              figured
              what is the order of complexity, using the O notation, you are done.
              And there are still other people who do not know where to use hyphen,
              em-dash or en-dash while writing plain English.

              "It is overly complicated. Too many rules. Can be simpler."

              However, as a self-proclaimed enlightened person, you"d better get along
              one simple rule:

              Complicated problems require complicated solutions.



              Regards,

                    Shlomi Fish

              >



              ----------------------------------------------------------------------
              Shlomi Fish        shlomif@...
              Home Page:         http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/

              An apple a day will keep a doctor away. Two apples a day will keep two
              doctors away.

                    Falk Fish



              Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



              To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              philosophy-il-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

              ________________________________________________________________________
              This email has been scanned for all viruses.

              Mercury Interactive Corporation
              Optimizing Business Processes to Maximize Business Results

              http://www.merc-int.com
              ________________________________________________________________________
            • Shlomi Fish
              ... Wrong! Some seemingly complicated problems require very simple solution. We ve been fighting drug abuse for years now, without much success and with
              Message 6 of 6 , Apr 16 1:19 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                On Wed, 16 Apr 2003, Omer Musaev wrote:

                > -----Original Message-----
                > From: Shlomi Fish [mailto:shlomif@...]
                > Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 7:58 AM
                > To: philosophy-il@yahoogroups.com
                > Subject: Re: "Objective Law", Morality, Ethos and Ethics
                >
                > > On Tue, 15 Apr 2003, Nadav Har'El wrote:
                >
                > >> It's the same as a computer program - it's nice for a computer program to
                > >> be lean and not contain millions of lines of code - but you cannot escape
                > >> the fact that in order to have more features and to support more
                > situtation,
                > >> your program will need to grow. It shouldn't bloat, and it shouldn't be
                > >> written to cater for irrelevant situtations, but it can still grow.
                > >>
                >
                > > Granted. But the law books of most countries are very much bloated. Way
                > > too much bloated. And many times they reflect the interests of the
                > > government, various politicians and interest groups more than they reflect
                > > that of objective Ethics.
                >
                > Some people do not get C++. Ever. They just bubble about bloated language,
                > and overcomplicated rules, and such and such and such.
                > Other people just
                > frown upon the constants in the complexity calculations. Once you had
                > figured
                > what is the order of complexity, using the O notation, you are done.
                > And there are still other people who do not know where to use hyphen,
                > em-dash or en-dash while writing plain English.
                >
                > "It is overly complicated. Too many rules. Can be simpler."
                >
                > However, as a self-proclaimed enlightened person, you"d better get along
                > one simple rule:
                >
                > Complicated problems require complicated solutions.
                >

                Wrong! Some seemingly complicated problems require very simple solution.
                We've been fighting drug abuse for years now, without much success and
                with increased crime rate and with a lot of hype in the media, and with
                tons of side effects. All this while most people ignored the most simple
                solution of legalizing drugs.

                In science, one follows the most simple explanation that explains all
                the relevant phenomena. You don't over-complicate science, unless it's
                absolutely necessary.

                If C++ is over-complicated, that's because Perl is much nicer and more
                straightforward to understand and work with. C++ supports OOP roughly as
                much as COBOL supports Functional Programming. And many people seem to
                agree with it. While primitive C++ implementations provide the C
                programmer with nice syntactic sugar, and some more peace of mind,
                Standard C++ is so over-complicated and so hard to implement and work
                with, that it is a templates and "references" mess.

                Keep it simple, stupid! I can show you how most laws in most countries are
                harmful or useless or potentially harmful. Seriously. The law canon of a
                country is over-complicated without a good reason. I agree that some
                things are necessary to be kept complicated. But the law canon of a
                country can be implemented with much less laws for the benefit of all of
                its citizens.

                Regards,

                Shlomi Fish

                >
                >
                > Regards,
                >
                >       Shlomi Fish
                >
                > >
                >
                >
                >
                > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                > Shlomi Fish        shlomif@...
                > Home Page:         http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/
                >
                > An apple a day will keep a doctor away. Two apples a day will keep two
                > doctors away.
                >
                >       Falk Fish
                >
                >
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                >
                >
                >
                > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > philosophy-il-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                >
                >
                >
                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                >
                > ________________________________________________________________________
                > This email has been scanned for all viruses.
                >
                > Mercury Interactive Corporation
                > Optimizing Business Processes to Maximize Business Results
                >
                > http://www.merc-int.com
                > ________________________________________________________________________
                >
                >
                > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > philosophy-il-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                >
                >
                >
                > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                >
                >



                ----------------------------------------------------------------------
                Shlomi Fish shlomif@...
                Home Page: http://t2.technion.ac.il/~shlomif/

                An apple a day will keep a doctor away. Two apples a day will keep two
                doctors away.

                Falk Fish
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.