Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!mangoe From: mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) Newsgroups: net.philosophy Subject: Re: The Principle of Non-interference Message-ID: <1241@umcp-cs.UUCP> Date: Wed, 14-Aug-85 21:37:21 EDT Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.1241 Posted: Wed Aug 14 21:37:21 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 18-Aug-85 23:45:27 EDT References: <588@mmintl.UUCP> <549@utastro.UUCP> Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD Lines: 19 In article <549@utastro.UUCP> padraig@utastro.UUCP (Padraig Houlahan) writes: >> There is a problem with the principle of non-interference as a basis >> for morality: it is insufficient. There are a great many cases where >> there is an interaction between two or more people, where it is not >> clear whether interference has taken place, or who has interfered with >> whom. >As I understand it, "interference" in recent discussions means curtailing >another's freedoms. Since no man is an island, the principle of >non-interference is presented as one of minimizing the curtailment of >another's freedoms. In that case, though, all of the moral system is embedded in the evaluations one makes to decide which freedom to keep and which to curtail. Charley Wingate umcp-cs!mangoe "The punkers-- for once, they were innocent victims!"