(urth) Gene Wolfe Fans Talk Politics (Again)

[Adam Thornton]

On May 20, 2009, at 6:39 AM, Daniel D Jones wrote:

>
> No, we don't need an exhaustive list.  We need simple principles to  
> define the
> terms.  In short, you're free to do anything you like so long as you  
> do no
> harm to me and mine.

If we don't create an exhaustive list, we're going to get an ever- 
cascading list of entitlements that become fundamental rights.  I  
thought that was part of the problem we were trying to solve.

"Do no harm," is also tricky.  I mean, every time I breathe, I'm using  
up oxygen that you *could* use.  If I drive to the grocery store, I'm  
removing some gasoline from the global oil supply and thus making it  
just a little bit more expensive for a humanitarian aid convoy in  
Africa in five years.

Let's say I have a silver mine.  You live below it on the mountain.  I  
do all my mining and waste disposal on land I own, as is my right.   
However, my waste disposal makes YOUR well water undrinkable since  
water doesn't respect property boundaries.  Am I within my rights to  
say, "hey, I'm doing lawful things on my own damn property--your well  
is not my problem!" ?

"No" harm is clearly not possible.  What is the epsilon that is close- 
enough-to-zero-for-rights-determination-process, and who gets to  
decide it?

Adam
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4988 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.urth.net/pipermail/urth-urth.net/attachments/20090520/2e3782e9/attachment-0004.bin>