Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!psuvax!psuvm%v0p
From: psuvm%v0p@psuvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: 
Message-ID: <502@psuvm.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 1-Mar-84 21:35:13 EST
Article-I.D.: psuvm.502
Posted: Thu Mar  1 21:35:13 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 3-Mar-84 09:10:20 EST
Lines: 20


        This answer seems to be more vague then the concept behind the
   original question.  How do you expect to get to a goal if you don't
   take a path??  (I won't even start in on the good and bad stuff.)

        First I should ask for a clarification.  Is the equality in question
   one of philisophical distance or morality?? If distance is the point then
   I would think that all paths are not equal. There are numerous ways to say
   the same thing whether they are *BAD* or *GOOD*. They do achieve the same
   end.

        If the question is morality or better yet end result then all paths
   are equal.  The distance between the intent and the achievement of that
   intent is eliminated as soon as the goal is achieved.  *The ends justify
   the means*....for better or worse.  Once you have reached your destination,
   the distance is meaningless.


             "The world of the mind encompasses the universe in its light"

                        --Paul Mattes   V0P@PSUVM.BITNET