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