Thank-you Boyd,
I've been thinking about an analogy. I hope it's coherent.
Two families of cave people find they must combine resources to
fight a marauding saber-tooth tiger. These animals have been cave
people's primary enemy forever. And this one has recently been
picking off family members one by one. The clan's two dominant
males set down to discuss strategy and come up with a brilliant
plan for trapping this tiger. But then they differ on exactly how
to prevent future tiger invasions. They get so involved in
arguing their differences over long-term prevention that they
alienate their families and fail at the prime directive to
combine resources in order to set the trap. Meanwhile the tiger
is right outside. Fast forward: Even though most members of this
clan were killed by the tiger, the brilliant strategy managed to
escape and survive. It was eventually applied many many
generations later effectively. Saber tooth Tigers were eventually
all killed off; humans eventually thrived - but only after untold
thousands of centuries, untold millions of arguments, and untold
millions of misapplications of principle. We aren't sure if any
long-term strategy was ever agreed upon or employed successfully.
If it was, we suspect it was at most only a small modification of
the group-trap principle. We suspect that once the prime
directive was widely employed, it was so successful in
dramatically reducing the number of cats, the total-eradication /
prevention plan became much clearer (and was seen as
one-in-the-same or not needed?). But in the end, it's all the
process of communication, and it was all necessary.
************
{American jurors have complete Constitutional authority to vote
"not guilty" based on nothing more than a disagreement with the
case, no matter the evidence - despite the judge's instructions.
There is absolutely no obligation to vote "guilty" to arrive at a
unanimous verdict. Get on a jury, stand your ground, and fulfill
its other main purpose: to counteract abusive government and
unjust lawsuits.
See www.fija.org
[Please adopt this as your own signature.] }
_____
this is actually very well thought out and informative post. And
until we get much further along the road to liberty and freedom,
it is really only a theoretical debate on an obscure point of
philosophy. And I will willingly concede that until then it is a
moot point.
BWS
_____
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
