Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/12/84; site aero.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwrba!aero!foy
From: foy@aero.ARPA (Richard Foy )
Newsgroups: net.abortion
Subject: Re: Justification
Message-ID: <347@aero.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 12-Aug-85 13:21:22 EDT
Article-I.D.: aero.347
Posted: Mon Aug 12 13:21:22 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 18-Aug-85 03:44:11 EDT
References: <1056@noscvax.UUCP>
Reply-To: foy@aero.UUCP (Richard Foy (Veh. Systems))
Distribution: net
Organization: The Aerospace Corp., El Segundo, CA
Lines: 21
Summary: 

In article <1056@noscvax.UUCP> powers@noscvax.UUCP (William J. Powers) writes:
>Just a word about the use of the word "justification".
>
>explicitly, they are not complete thoughts.  These sentences have to
>be modified to read  "Can you justify that under the Code of
>Hammurabi?" or "Is that justifiable by Islamic law?".
>
>The point is that some system of rules must be specified.  This being
>
>we have to be especially sensitive to the prejudices and assumptions
>implicit in our use of words.  Words are walls which limit our field
>of view.  Ideas are housed in words and are similarly constrained.
>
>That is all, Bill Powers.
 
This explains why there is so much heat and so litle real communication
that goes on here. People tend to mix up different codes when they argue
their points.

richard foy