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