oaf@mit-vax.UUCP ([Oded Anoaf Feingold]) (05/17/85)
(me) ... >> That's also my answer to your "So what?" in response to >> the plea for civility. When I hire people, one >> consideration I have is whether they spread happiness >> among the people they're working with. I would do my >> colleagues a great disservice if I invited you into >> their midst. I would never do such a thing. (he) > Perhaps you can refresh my memory. What is (was) this about? Okay... Article 8343 of net.politics: From: mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) Subject: Re: A Plea for Civility Date: 8 May 85 22:48:00 GMT Article-I.D.: acf4.1340068 -------------------------------------------------- >/* sdd@pyuxh.UUCP (S Daniels) / 6:12 pm May 7, 1985 */ >A thought to remember. Some of the people who read the net >might be writing your next year's appraisal or be potential >employers. >... >Steve Daniels (!pyuxh!sdd) So what? -------------------------------------------------- I'll communicate with Mr. Sykora privately about other aspects of his response. The point I wanted to make was that the "familiar" lines in Reagan's 2nd inaugural If not us, then who? If not now, then when? ...with the middle line missing (If I am for myself alone, what am I?) typify his callousness toward the poor and disadvantaged, and his lack of integrity. Mr. Sykora's responses didn't address that issue, but picked a fight to score points for his opinions. As shown above, he doesn't seem to feel obligated to be civil. Fine, so I'll drop the subject (in public). -- Oded Feingold {decvax, harvard}!mitvax!oaf MIT AI Lab oaf%oz@mit-mc.ARPA 545 Tech Sq. 617-253-8598 work Cambridge, Mass. 02139 617-371-1796 home
mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) (05/18/85)
>/* oaf@mit-vax.UUCP ([Oded Anoaf Feingold]) / 5:22 pm May 16, 1985 */ >The point I wanted to make was that the "familiar" lines in Reagan's >2nd inaugural > If not us, then who? If not now, then when? >...with the middle line missing (If I am for myself alone, what am I?) >typify his callousness toward the poor and disadvantaged, and his lack >of integrity. Mr. Sykora's responses didn't address that issue, but >picked a fight to score points for his opinions. As shown above, he >doesn't seem to feel obligated to be civil. > >Fine, so I'll drop the subject (in public). >-- >Oded Feingold {decvax, harvard}!mitvax!oaf Before the subject is dropped I'd like to state that I feel I did address this issue in my response. I said something on the order of -- I don't see how not helping someone can be construed as hurting them. Mike Sykora PS -- Sorry I haven't replied to your mailings, but I can't seem to get thru.
brian@digi-g.UUCP (Merlyn Leroy) (05/28/85)
>Before the subject is dropped I'd like to state that I feel I did address >this issue in my response. I said something on the order of -- >I don't see how not helping someone can be construed as hurting them. > > Mike Sykora Hurting someone: a criminal Not helping: a creep As you can see, there IS a difference... Merlyn Leroy
mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) (06/01/85)
>/* brian@digi-g.UUCP (Merlyn Leroy) / 10:34 am May 28, 1985 */ >Hurting someone: a criminal > Not helping: a creep How much do I have to help people so that I'm not a creep? Why? Mike Sykora
orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) (06/04/85)
> >/* brian@digi-g.UUCP (Merlyn Leroy) / 10:34 am May 28, 1985 */ > > >Hurting someone: a criminal > > Not helping: a creep > > How much do I have to help people so that I'm not a creep? Why? > > Mike Sykora If somebody is lying wounded on the sidewalk are you obligated to help? If an orphan is running around naked with a belly bloated from hunger are you obligated to help? If you bring a helpless infant into this world are you obligated to feed and care for it? Yes, we are all obligated as human beings to help each other out. The reason is very simple - when I help someone else out sometime when I am in the same position someone else will help me out. In fact, we all would not be alive at all if our parents did not feed and care for us when we were helpless infants. Children will die without food, moreover they will also die without love and affection. Helping each other is quintessentially human. tim sevener whuxl!orb
orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) (06/04/85)
> >/* brian@digi-g.UUCP (Merlyn Leroy) / 10:34 am May 28, 1985 */ > > >Hurting someone: a criminal > > Not helping: a creep > > How much do I have to help people so that I'm not a creep? Why? > > Mike Sykora In a previous posting I pointed to extreme cases in which our obligation to help each other is quite obvious. But, except for parenting, they are rare cases in our everyday life. But in moving to New Jersey from the Midwest I am struck daily by the difference between cooperation and competition. I hope readers will note that these comments do not apply to either all people from New Jersey OR the Midwest. In all cases there is a range from nice to mean with people in all categories. But the median and average behavior is different. Everyday as I drive in New Jersey I am struck by the almost total lack of cooperation and consideration for others in this state behind the wheel. When a line of cars is stopped at a traffic light they never leave room for side streets to get out- instead they cram up as close to the next bumper as possible. This means that anybody waiting in the side street is totally stuck until the traffic light changes. This in turn makes people in the side street very irritable so that they are compelled to simply barge out into the main street come hell or high water. And indeed they *have* to - if they don't nobody will ever give them room to get out. This generally doesn't happen in the Midwest. People cooperate and try to consider others, especially when such consideration entails little real cost. Midwestern drivers are far more apt to leave room for people to get out from side streets. The problem where I came from at four-way stops was waiting for somebody to actually go - most drivers were patient enough to simply wait for others to go first before they would go. This same behavior is echoed again and again on the road. What is the cost of simply leaving room for side streets to get out onto the road when you are stopped at a traffic light anyway? The cost is almost nothing - when the light turns green there is always a lagtime before traffic starts moving anyway so being 6 to 10 feet closer to the next car in line hardly matters. But most people in New Jersey are too competitve or selfish to stop to consider that : all they think about is "I am in a big hurry. I want to get as close to that traffic light as possible." The fact that sometime *they* will be the one stuck in the side street because some creep failed to leave room for them to get out never occurs to them. Because they are too selfish to consider the good of others *everybody* suffers. Mr. Sykora and his fellow Libertarians can live that way if they wish. But I find such a selfish attitude and culture a nightmare. tim sevener whuxl!orb
brian@digi-g.UUCP (Merlyn Leroy) (06/04/85)
[My reply to Sykora about the difference between hurting someone & not helping] >>Hurting someone: a criminal >> Not helping: a creep > >How much do I have to help people so that I'm not a creep? Why? > > Mike Sykora "17.4 Quaatlues / fortnight" "Because" The above answers contain as much sense as most of Sykora's postings, which seem to be of the form: quote ::= '>' lettertext; query ::= "How come?" | "Why is this?" | "Who says?" | "Why not?" ad nauseum; quote query ...with no vestige of argument in between. The Lou Costello of the net. Merlyn Leroy Lou: "The left fielder's name?" Bud: "Why!" Lou: "Because!" Bud: "Oh, he's center field"
simard@loral.UUCP (Ray Simard) (06/05/85)
In article <1340134@acf4.UUCP> mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) writes: >>/* brian@digi-g.UUCP (Merlyn Leroy) / 10:34 am May 28, 1985 */ > >>Hurting someone: a criminal >> Not helping: a creep > >How much do I have to help people so that I'm not a creep? Why? > > Mike Sykora Furthermore, am I a creep because I want to decide WHEN, WHERE, HOW MUCH, and TO WHOM my helping is given, rather than having a tangled government bureaucracy, motivated by policial considerations probably much more than compassion, decide these things for me, and without my consent or even my input? [ I am not a stranger, but a friend you haven't met yet ] Ray Simard Loral Instrumentation, San Diego {ucbvax, ittvax!dcdwest}!sdcsvax!sdcc6!loral!simard ...Though we may sometimes disagree, You are still a friend to me!
mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) (06/05/85)
>/* orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) / 9:47 am Jun 4, 1985 */ >If somebody is lying wounded on the sidewalk are you obligated to help? No. I'm not obligated. I may choose to help out of compassion, though. Or I may not. For example, if it is someone I despise, I may not help him/her. WHY should I feel obligated? What have I to gain from assuming such obligations? >If an orphan is running around naked with a belly bloated from hunger >are you obligated to help? There are, I suspect, a huge number of orphans in such predicaments? How many am I obliged to help? How much help? Why? >If you bring a helpless infant into this world are you obligated to >feed and care for it? My need for self-respect ensures that should I father a child, I will not do it (voluntarily) unless I am prepared to care for the child. >Yes, we are all obligated as human beings to help each other out. >The reason is very simple - when I help someone else out sometime >when I am in the same position someone else will help me out. In my experience, this is true only for people with whom I associate continually. As for strangers, I suspect that if you help one, in the majority of cases they will help you, given the opportunity. However, being that this person is a stranger, it is not likely that they will help you because it is not likely that they will ever see you again. To suppose that stranger X will help you because you once helped stranger Y is an assumption that needs some justification. The only possible justification for such a belief, it seems to me, is that if you make a habit of helping people, your personality will develop (change) in such a way as to make people more likely to want to help you. While this sounds somewhat plausible, it's hardly obvious to me, and would be extremely difficult to test empirically. Any thoughts on this? The most interesting thing about your contention above is that you first say that people are obligated to help others. Then you claim to justify it by attempting to show that it is in one's self interest to help others. Am I obliged to do everything that is in my self interest? It appears that you have confused a moral question with a practical one. If you want to show that helping others is in one's self interest, you need to give evidence that this is true. If you want to justify the contention that people are morally obligated to help others, you will first have to justify the concept of morality, and then you will have to show why the obligation to help others is a moral obligation. GOOD LUCK! >In fact, we all would not be alive at all if our parents did not >feed and care for us when we were helpless infants. Yes, of course. But I don't consider my relationship with my parents to be comparable (as regards the question of helping other people) to my relationship with other human beings in general. >Children will die >without food, moreover they will also die without love and affection. >Helping each other is quintessentially human. > tim sevener whuxl!orb As I understand it, the definition of humanity is a biological one, not a political, moral, etc. one. Mike Sykora
david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin) (06/05/85)
> > >/* brian@digi-g.UUCP (Merlyn Leroy) / 10:34 am May 28, 1985 */ > > > > >Hurting someone: a criminal > > > Not helping: a creep > > > > How much do I have to help people so that I'm not a creep? Why? > > > > Mike Sykora > > If somebody is lying wounded on the sidewalk are you obligated to help? > If an orphan is running around naked with a belly bloated from hunger > are you obligated to help? > If you bring a helpless infant into this world are you obligated to > feed and care for it? > Yes, we are all obligated as human beings to help each other out. > The reason is very simple - when I help someone else out sometime > when I am in the same position someone else will help me out. > In fact, we all would not be alive at all if our parents did not > feed and care for us when we were helpless infants. Children will die > without food, moreover they will also die without love and affection. > Helping each other is quintessentially human. > tim sevener whuxl!orb This is all very well and good, but as I recall, the specific issue that started this discussion was Social Security, which, I beg to remind you, is NOT needs-based. Those old folks who qualify for welfare, I won't begrudge them it; I still see no reason to distribute money based on age indiscriminitely. Does charity require wanton spending? David Rubin
mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) (06/06/85)
>/* orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) / 10:09 am Jun 4, 1985 */ >Because they are too selfish to consider the good of others >*everybody* suffers. I believe you mean "too self-centered" or "too self-important." The word "selfish" is ambiguous in that some people use it to mean petty self-importance, while others use it to mean enlightened self-interest. >Mr. Sykora and his fellow Libertarians can live that way if they wish. >But I find such a selfish attitude and culture a nightmare. > tim sevener whuxl!orb I can't remember advocating selfishness (in either of the two senses I have described) on the net. When did I do this? Are you saying that Libertarianism entails advocacy of selfishness (in either of the two meanings I have described)? How so? Mike Sykora
chrisa@azure.UUCP (Chris Andersen) (06/07/85)
> [...] > Yes, we are all obligated as human beings to help each other out. > The reason is very simple - when I help someone else out sometime > when I am in the same position someone else will help me out. > tim sevener whuxl!orb This may be true, but it does not mean we are obligated to help. It only means that it is probably in our better interest to help (whatever happened to altruism?). Chris Andersen tektronix!azure!chrisa
mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) (06/07/85)
>/* brian@digi-g.UUCP (Merlyn Leroy) / 2:01 pm Jun 4, 1985 */ >The above answers contain as much sense as most of Sykora's postings, >which seem to be of the form: > >quote ::= '>' lettertext; >query ::= "How come?" | "Why is this?" | "Who says?" | "Why not?" ad nauseum; My reply was intended to point out the absurdity of your claim, i.e., that to add no quantification to the term "not helping someone" in this context renders it essentially meaningless. Of course, I didn't expect that you would see the absurdity of it, being that you were the one who posted it. Mike Sykora