dr_who@umcp-cs.UUCP (08/14/83)
Laura Creighton's criticism of Kenneth Almquist's defense of the middle ground is invalid. Kenneth's definitions of selfishness and altruism are attempts to provide identical ones to Tom's (at least as far as the middle ground is concerned). If those attempts failed (I don't think so), then Tom can say so. The only thing I can see that might make someone think that Kenneth's definition is different from Tom's, is Kenneth's statement that "Once you place any constraint on concern for self, you no longer have pure selfishness." However, I believe that this statement is intended not as a definition, but as a statement of (alleged) fact. The alleged fact is that constraints regarding people's rights cannot be derived from self-interest. Tom would deny, whereas Kenneth (and I) would affirm, that respect for the rights of others is a *real constraint* on self-interest. By "real constraint," I mean one that reduces the effectiveness of the pursuit of personal benefit. --Paul Torek, U of MD College Park