From: Blanc <blancw@cnw.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 11:22:32 +0800
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Subject: Re: rant on the morality of confidentiality
In-Reply-To: <v03102804b0e238146c15@[207.167.93.63]>
Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19980114191915.007f5990@cnw.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Vladimir the MoraLogical wrote:

>I don't think BWs claim that there is a difference between 
>immoral scientists and immoral science. immoral science is what
>immoral scientists practice. what's the point? my personal point
>is that if we had a culture of people who were concerned about
>morality, perhaps we would have institutions that reflect
>integrity. 
...........................................................

First the question was, what is "moral", now it must be, what is "science":
 what makes science, or its methods, 'scientific' - what's the difference
and what's the point; is there a relation, and which is first, the chicken,
or the egg (could science discover the truth about morality, and would that
make the science moral, or the scientists)?

Of course, if people were more moral, we would have institutions which
reflected that integrity.  The problem is, how could they be made to become
so, and what type of methods, used toward that end, would be moral?

    ..
Blanc