From: Sayke@aol.com
Date: Mon Oct 11 1999 - 01:35:52 MDT
In a message dated 10/10/99 10:26:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
patrickw@cs.monash.edu.au writes:
> > to follow this path of inquiry a little more, is it not lead-pipe
blunt
> > honesty to openly treat people as objects to be manipulated? and how,
> > exactly, is 'treating people as other living beings like oneself'
> > incompatible with 'treating people as objects to be manipulated'?
[lightbulb: i manipulate myself on a regular basis. or do i? ;) -- sayke]
>
> What's honest about it? You either treat people as objects
> or you don't. Some people do some people don't. I am not
> even sure choice comes into to a large degree.
and the debate sinks into the dank, dark, and necassary swamp of
redefinition. whats an object, as opposed to a person, and what does it mean
to treat people as objects as opposed to, well, people? is the difference in
the attribution of significance; in the attribution of some kind of
subjective/intrinsic value (im using that term way too much) to something
outside oneself?
if so, i would call it intellectually honest to deem such attribution
irrational. if you disagree, im sure youll elaborate. ;)
> The way you describe yourself does make you sound like you
> would be classified as having one or another of the personality
> disorders as defined by DSM-IV. Of course Aspergis (high-
> functioning autistics) also tend to treat people as if they
> were objects.
fascinating. what other methods are there to find out if theres anything
truly different going on here, short of, say, an mri peek at the corpus
callosum? i seem to remember something about mri peeks at corpus callosums
being relevent to this discussion, but i dont remember how, exactly. im
tired. but im not autistic...
> Its a logical falicy to believe that acting in one's own
> interests also implies that you must treat other's as
> objects to be manipulated.
interisting. i thought of them as equivalent... but i suppose we could
mean different things by "treating people as objects". shit, im not getting
this. since when are people not objects? i mean, perceptions are things, and
things are objects, and people are perceptions... the resulting venn diagram
would show that at least some people are objects... im rambling. goodnight.
sayke, v2.3.05
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:05:29 MST