 | | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
<3874CFB7.C78E8E40@voyager.net> <FnxHxs.MKz@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Perhaps a workable patent system could be constructed which would recognize parallel development. I don't even see (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
(...) I think ideas are not identical to physical items, and therefore not identical to physical property. But it is very useful to extend our concepts for dealing with physical property to the realm of ideas. Tangent: this is something to be (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art and Property ZRights
|
|
(...) Then call a vote on it in congress while you can! :-) Bruce (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
Scott: (...) D'oh! I forgot to address that! With "not being prevented from obtaining health care" I was trying to avoid implying that "the people" should pick up the bill. My oversight! (...) Well, the easiest criticism against this is that (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Patents and IP and stuff (was Re: Goodness of Man? etc)
|
|
(...) What happens in the case of "obvious" developments? "Obvious" is of course difficult to judge (which is why it merits quotation marks) but take this theoretical example: I live in a very primitive society. We've just started developing ideas. (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art! or Not Art!
|
|
(...) Modified by Goya or some later censor? I presume that he may have thought it went over the line into "that's just plain sick" (and not justified by the myths) or it simply is a delusion by some scholar. It certainly starts to edge over the (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) You have a point, however, I think we are on the verge (if not already over the cliff) of having a market which will again support good art. This is due to the internet. With the minimal cost of distribution, who cares what the mass market (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
(...) Wouldn't you then have legal recourse to sue (or whatever) that person for stealing? After all, it's your goods he's profiting from, without your permission, neh? <snippage> (...) Under a Libertarian system (which is one of the premises to (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art and Property ZRights
|
|
(...) Yowza! Sort of, maybe, but I don't think that too many of that majority think its goals are currently realistic, for some of the reasons already addressed in the various Libertopia posts! Dave! (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art and Property ZRights
|
|
(...) You may have a point there, although I would argue that is still an emotional response. (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
(...) Drat, I should have said Communist flag. Sorry, I was typing faster than I was thinking! Does this mean I get to stop now? ;) Scott ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems Administrator/CAD Operator-Affiliated Engineers -> (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
<3874A730.471E9696@voyager.net> <slrn879ac2.3ti.matt...ia.bu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) What Larry is saying is that the guv steals its (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
|
(...) Aw, Larry, you had me right along with you up till this bit. Well, I'm still mostly with you, but a considerable problem with art today--and this isn't just confined to our fine nation--is the predominant aesthetic trend as much as any dubious (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art and Property ZRights
|
|
(...) Start worrying. We are. If you go by sentiment, anyway. (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
(...) Bzzt. Scott "loses" the debate, he mentioned Nazis first. Darn, he was doing so well, too. <grin> (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Matthew jumps in (was Re: Goodness of Man?, etc.)
|
|
(...) [snip] (...) Found this: (URL) I don't think you say a single word about property, let alone property rights as a foundation, though. For what it's worth: in fact, I agree strongly with your conclusion in that case. The weak link you point out (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
Dave, (...) Well, whatever form it may be, it is still the same. My point is that whether you talk about providing health care, being prevented from having health care, etc., someone still has to pay for it. Whether that be the government, or (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art and Property ZRights
|
|
(...) Some art is intended to create an intellectual response, not emotional, or as an aid to meditation (Mark Rothko's "glowing squares"), or.... (...) Each will assign their own unique value. (...) When Libertarians are the majority party, I'll (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Swearing?
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes: ] You know, the 1st degree kind with no extenuating circumstances: "you have a (...) Well, 'round these parts you might find a jury willing to acquit you on that defense! Dave! (who doesn't have a 4558 (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art! or Not Art!
|
|
(...) like (...) And even more frightening if the academnic speculation is true that the painting was modified from its original form, with Saturn originally having a very erect phallus while he devours the child. -- jthompson@esker.com "Float on a (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
