Re: SpamAssassin and OHA (was: [ox-en] SpamAssassin (was: OHA/ODA in English))
- From: Graham Seaman <graham seul.org>
- Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 18:11:42 -0500 (EST)
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Casimir Purzelbaum wrote:
* Graham Seaman (2003-12-15 08:33)
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003, Casimir Purzelbaum wrote:
I think -- even more than you do -- that alienation is the
key aspect here: Who would need a rule if everybody would
know to behave himself as to not alienate himself from the
community of the people he lives in? (and if the community
would take care of not alienating itself from itself...)
If there was a "mechanism" ensuring non-alienation you would
not need any rules, but you could observe rules (just as
you can observe rules in sciences).
In other words, you would replace censorship with
self-censorship and external discipline with internal
discipline...
Not at all!
Internal discipline is based upon 'rules' as well as external
discipline is based on 'laws'. And I was going for a "fantasy"
;-) against rules here. How would you call, for instance, an
instinct? Is this internal discipline? I'm not trying to say,
that people should forget about thinking'n all and follow their
so-called instincts instead. What I'm trying to say here, is
that reason and feeling could evolve generally to a degree, where
they work without rules, discipline, punishment or control.
Along with the conditions of life that are the basis for this or
that way of interaction in society and reflections about it.
This sounds dangerously close to wanting a 'new man', on the model of the
Critique of the Gotha Program (and Soviet and related history).
One of the appeals of free software itself is exactly that it doesn't need
a 'new man'; people can do it for their own human/selfish reasons.
The problem with the older approach is that either you wait for the
new man to evolve in this society - which won't happen, because the
society is wrong for it - or you create e temporary rule-bound society
'just for the time being' where you wait for the new man to evolve.
But the 'time being' ends up being permanent.
You would also need to remove one of the most obvious features
of free-software-like groups: membership of multiple
overlapping groups (I'm trying to avoid 'community' - too many
unrelated 19th century gemeinschaftlich associations). Because
if I'm a member of both software using groups and a
virus-writing group, how do I avoid alienating myself from 'the
group'?
Depends on your understanding of group. I did choose "community"
because it can be understood on a small and on a large scale.
And the "ultimate" community I meant in the above, is human
society as a whole. Whatever we call it, it seems to be clear to
me that at all levels in our current situation this community is
alienated from itself -- and so are it's members (of all levels).
What I was tryiong to do by using 'group' instead of 'community' was too
emphasize that conflicts of interest may not only be between individual
and one group, but individual and different groups - asnd so between
groups. I don't see how you avoid conflicts of interest between groups by
evolving humans... A simple example: I live under a flight-path for the
airport. I would love to see planes banned from using this airport. But
many people in this area work in the airport, or they use it to go on
holiday, etc; they would like to see the number of planes increased. Some
people are in the first group (under the flightpath) some in the second
(use the airport), and some in both. The conflict is structural, and not
due to human nature. People in both groups have the conflict internally,
too.
(I suspect, that even though there is no better translation,
"alienation" and "Entfremdung" are not really adequate... I
suspect that the "alienation" (=Entfremdung) that I meant is
somewhat more "intrinsic" than the common understanding of
"alienation" in English ;-)
Could be, but I can't read your mind :-( It has a lot of possible shades
of meaning in english, too.
But to answer the question ;-) : You can only avoid alienating
yourself (or being alienated) from a group when they feel fine
with your "other" activities. And why should they not? (Again,
I'm not talking about todays conflicts, but about the question
whether they are "generally" "necessary" or not...)
This sounds very similar to the arguments between late 19th century
anarchists and William Morris, the most sympathetic to the anarchists of
the english communists; for example
http://www.marxists.org.uk/archive/morris/works/1890/nowhere/nowhere.htm#chap-14
(the section on how to decide whether to build a bridge, and whether
it is possible to avoid 'the tyranny of society').
or following Stefan Mn's Kantian theme:
http://www.marxists.org.uk/archive/morris/works/1889/sa/sa.htm
'if freedom from authority means the assertion of the advisability or
possibility of an individual man doing what he pleases always and under
all circumstances, this is an absolute negation of society, and makes
Communism as the highest expression of society impossible; but when you
begin to qualify this assertion of the right to do as you please by adding
"as long as you don't interfere with other people's rights to do the
same," the exercise of some kind of authority becomes necessary.
If individuals are not to coerce others, there must somewhere be an
authority which is prepared to coerce them not to coerce; and that
authority must clearly be collective....
Any community conceivable will sometimes determine on collective action
which, without being in itself immoral or oppressive, would give pain to
some of its members; and what is to be done then if it happens to be a
piece of business which must be either done or left alone? would the small
minority have to give way or the large majority?'
Basically, your 'why should they not' has an infinite number of possible
answers, and I don't see how it could not unless life had stopped.
Graham
Reluctantly, I find myself on the side of 'rules'. I hope
someone will convince me out of it ;-)
...not sure if I can manage, but I'll try ;-)
Regards,
Casimir.
_______________________
http://www.oekonux.org/
_______________________
http://www.oekonux.org/