From: "John T. Duryea" <jtduryea-AT-dmv.com>
Subject: Re: be civil!
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1998 19:55:00 -0500




> I have a very elementary thought, do hear me out. what do you all think
>of the judicial system today? the enforcement of moral judgement is
>affected by Intention eg manslaughter,insanity, drunkdriving   . well
>what would you all think of that ? is it a somewhat adequate and fair
>system of morality ?  what would N have to say about this ?
>
>
>jesse
>
>in regards to your question, most specificly, your refrence to the insanity
>defense.  I think that this idea can be addressed within in the context of
the
>physo-psychology discussion that has been prevalent on this list as of
recent.
>If our emotions and supoposidly rational decisions are in many cases ruled
by
>chemical reactions in the brain, ie. the physical, what recourse would the
law
>have in accepting this defense (although it does). This idea excuses every
>action upon the idea that we have no overt control over our actions.  On
top
>of this every law system is based upon a morality, in the case of our
system a
>christian morality.  N's veiw of an over ruling system of morality is
evident,
>but what would he suggest we use instead.  Law has to based upon some
>morality, even the morality of the individual, perhaps teh utilitarianism
of
>Mill is our only recourse.
>
> M.E.


>From a historical sense, law is and has always been, a set of codified rules
for the vanquished to follow as set forth by the victors so as to seal
forever their victory. Witness the Normans in England or the Bolsheviks in
Russia. This is life, who would want it any other way? Can one imagine the
losers writing the law?

John T. Duryea



	--- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---