RE: [Leica] Amoral [was: Ammoral, but in any case, way OFF-TOPIC]

["Kotsinadelis, Peter (Peter)" <peterk@lucent.com>]

Bill Clinton??

- -----Original Message-----
From: phong (Doan huu Phong) [mailto:phong@doan-ltd.com]
Sent: Friday, December 04, 1998 10:28 AM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: Re: [Leica] Amoral [was: Ammoral, but in any case, way
OFF-TOPIC]


So we are like animals in our similarities to them,
and we are different in the way we are different from them
right ;-) ?

The point though is that I don't think we are morally superior
to other animals, and that in fact we and they are quite amoral,
of course, subject to sample variations, just like Leica.

Who was it that said that dogs look up to us, cats look down
on us, and pigs look at us as equals ?

- - Phong


- -----Original Message-----
From: Francesco <fls@san.rr.com>
Date: Friday, December 04, 1998 3:31 AM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Amoral [was: Ammoral]


>I think this is because no other species has a developed
>enough nervous system to be able to commit "atrocities"
>as we do.  So-called "atrocities" are mirrors of aggressive
>and protective behavior patterns in lower species.  We are,
>in fact, animals like the rest of them.  Just another variety.
>We kill, eat, have babies, die, and shed blood like all other
>animals.
>
>Francesco
>
>At 01:28 PM 12/2/98 , I wrote:
>>This is too homocentric (Homo Sapiens, that is) a view.
>>We in fact are not like the rest of the animals.
>>I grew up in a war, and I cannot think of another
>>species that commits the atrocities that we homos do.
>>But no need to feel bad about it.  We are what we are.
>>
>>- Phong
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Frank Dernie <FrankDernie@compuserve.com>
>>> One would have thought that the human race
>>>was sufficiently civilised for us not to be like the rest of the animals,
>>>but we are.