Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!eagle!mhuxt!mhuxi!mhuxa!houxm!hogpc!houti!trc
From: trc@houti.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: reason; rights in conflict
Message-ID: <402@houti.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 22-Aug-83 18:57:39 EDT
Article-I.D.: houti.402
Posted: Mon Aug 22 18:57:39 1983
Date-Received: Tue, 23-Aug-83 09:07:31 EDT
Lines: 23

Response to stan the leprechaun hacker:

Rational behavior is that which is based upon reason, applied to the
reality of one's nature and one's circumstances.  Reality is the basis
for "selecting" it, and reality *is* absolute.  That is, whatever is
real, is real.  No amount of wishing or hoping or lying to one's self 
is going to change it.  Reason is the process of applying logical thought
to known facts and principles to deduce further facts, or to induce and 
then test new general principles.  The arena of application is that of
concepts, which are integrations of more basic concepts and of perceptions.

You seem to have mis-read or missed some of my notes:  I do not believe
that "a proper definition of rights and freedoms somehow automagically 
excludes conflicts."  I do think that a proper definition (which I have
given - do you wish to criticize it directly?) will prevent rational
people who follow its implications from *causing* conflicts.  I have
explictly stated that rights can (rarely) be brought into conflict, by 
natural events or irrational actions, and that much of the advances that
civilized men have achieved have been aimed at reducing the possibility of 
natural events causing such situations.  There is nothing magical about that.

	Tom Craver
	houti!trc