Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site psivax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen From: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) Newsgroups: net.philosophy Subject: Re: The Principle of Non-interference Message-ID: <749@psivax.UUCP> Date: Tue, 24-Sep-85 16:23:36 EDT Article-I.D.: psivax.749 Posted: Tue Sep 24 16:23:36 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 28-Sep-85 05:52:31 EDT References: <1732@pyuxd.UUCP> <1652@umcp-cs.UUCP> Reply-To: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) Organization: Pacesetter Systems Inc., Sylmar, CA Lines: 28 In article <1652@umcp-cs.UUCP> mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) writes: > >Well, in many cases this is quite obviously not true. People typically >operate under some delusions about their state of well-being. Were there no >such delusions, I could agree whole-heartedly with Rich's system. But in >fact there are. To take an extreme case, consider a man, a farmer, who >suffers a massive heart attack. Awakening in the hospital, he struggles to >leave. Can it really be argued that he is competent to judge his condition? >Are not the doctors justified in restraining him from killing himself as he >acts out the delusion that he is well? Certainly, this example is extreme. >The problem I see is that there is no clear-cut dividing line; situations >run from this all the way down to where things are better let to go wrong, >to where the good or badness of the situation is quite unclear. > Or there is my prefered class of examples. What if your 2-3 yr old child starts to run out into a busy street? Are you going to ignore it("don't interfere with him - it is bad to assume what is best for someone else"), try to *talk* him into coming back and hope you succedd in time, or physically grab the kid and forcibly place him back in the yard? I maintain that the last is the *only* reasonble course under the circumstances, but it is *clearly* a violation of non- interference! How is *this* justified in the non-interference morality? -- Sarima (Stanley Friesen) UUCP: {ttidca|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|quad1|nrcvax|bellcore|logico}!psivax!friesen ARPA: ttidca!psivax!friesen@rand-unix.arpa Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com