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!"