Re: SpamAssassin and OHA (was: [ox-en] SpamAssassin (was: OHA/ODA in English))
- From: Thomas Uwe Gruettmueller <sloyment gmx.net>
- Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 07:07:14 +0100
Hi Thomas,
On Sonntag 14 Dezember 2003 02:30, Thomas Berker wrote:
Kant would agree with Stefan on disagreeing rather than he
would agree with you. Kant is really looking for a way to
reconcile the common/general and the individual/particular
interest - right after he just has grasped that the invention
of the individual (which was pretty new then!) poses a problem
for the common - which is his unique achievement, btw. How you
recontextualise that is of course your choice, the question
remains why quoting him then?
I was thinking that Kant was just rephrasing what is called the
Golden Rule. If you believe that this is not the case, then
please consider changing the Wikipedia article about it:
http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule
Also, I did not try to say that Stefan is missing Kant's point,
but rather that he is missing my point. Maybe I should not have
mentioned Kant at all, in order to avoid confusion.
cu,
Thomas }:o{#
-- - http://217.160.174.154/~sloyment/ - --
"Look! They have different music on the dance floor..."
_______________________
http://www.oekonux.org/