Re: virus: Logic

Nathaniel Hall (
Tue, 07 Oct 1997 19:18:54 -0600

Richard Fawcett wrote:

> On Oct 6, 9:55pm, Nathaniel Hall wrote:
> > A virus is good, bad or neutral depending on it's content. To be a virus is
> simply an idea which
> > can be spread to others.
> I too am a newcomer having stumbled across this list just yesterday. However,
> it seems pretty clear to me that the moral implications (good, bad, etc.) of a
> virus are more to do with your value system than simply its content. Surely if
> you claim such intellectual prowess this is an elementary mistake!

Not at all. I claim values are objective not subjective. The trick is to have an
understanding of reality to the point that your values are close to objectivity if
not right in sync. Slavery was for a large part of human history an accepted norm.
Do you honestly believe then that it was moral and good?The Nateman