Re: work-or-pay system - legalities? general advice? | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Sharon Villines (sharonsharonvillines.com) | |
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 09:50:54 -0700 (PDT) |
On 17 Apr 2011, at 10:32 AM, Sharon Villines wrote: > Arguments based on hypotheticals are destructive because they are endless and > unresolvable. They require counter-arguments based on even more extreme > examples. "Destructive" was too strong a word to use here because arguments based on hypothetical situations are often not meant to be intentionally destructive. Still the effect often is. Because these situations do not actually exist, they can't actually be addressed to anyone's satisfaction. To try often becomes endless because more are raised. The kill constructive debate and solutions. Often the intention of hypotheticals is not to address real situations anyway — it is to demonstrate how compassionate the speaker is, but only for the hypothetical persons being compassioned for. All others should just go back to work and get a heart. Sharon ---- Sharon Villines Takoma Village Cohousing, Washington DC http://www.takomavillage.org
- Re: work-or-pay system - legalities? general advice?, (continued)
- Re: work-or-pay system - legalities? general advice? Sharon Villines, April 15 2011
- Re: work-or-pay system - legalities? general advice? David L. Mandel, April 16 2011
- Re: work-or-pay system - legalities? general advice? Sharon Villines, April 17 2011
- Re: work-or-pay system - legalities? general advice? Beverly Jones Redekop, April 17 2011
- Re: work-or-pay system - legalities? general advice? Sharon Villines, April 19 2011
- Re: work-or-pay system - legalities? general advice? R Philip Dowds, April 19 2011
- Re: work-or-pay system - legalities? general advice? Sharon Villines, April 19 2011
- Re: work-or-pay system - legalities? general advice? Richart Keller, April 20 2011
- Re: work-or-pay system - legalities? general advice? Sharon Villines, April 20 2011
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.