> I was taught in college not to speak metaphorically. More > specifically, not to *reason* metaphorically. This is because it is all too easy to > construct an entirely bogus argument that sounds good. For an > analogical argument to be valid, you must (emphasize "must") show that > the subject (civil rights) share the property in question (requirement for due > process) with the analogy (animal rights). Near as I can tell, animal > rights does not have any notion of due process, so the above > "rattlesnake" argument is a devilishly persuasive load of crap :-) Metaphors are fun for writer types like me, but you're correct, Crispin. Its a faulty way to argue. I just wanted to talk about puppies. Can we talk about puppies now? :-D Seriously, this is an interesting issue and the opinions expressed on all sides are very compelling. But, I agree with those that say this should go off the CRIME list. We should stick to talking about security issues on this list. I think we're straying into a realm of counterproductive flame-wars. ------------------------------------ Andrew Plato President / Principal Consultant Anitian Corporation (503) 644-5656 office (503) 201-0821 cell http://www.anitian.com Yahoo Messenger: Anitian ------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun May 26 2002 - 11:34:03 PDT