Re: Thieves Philosophy 101

[Quantum_Cat <quantum-no-spam@cotse.com>]

Hiya, Cooter.

 *>In order for a case to to made every micro point must be fully considered
 *>one-at-a-time.

Well, I take issue with this point.  Exhaustive proofs, while effective, are 
rarely practical.  Oh.. And WTH is a "micro point"?  Another Cooter invention?  
;)  Anyway, let's see where this leads.  

 *>The ONLY micro point covered here is the refutation of your claim that theft
 *>does not require "value". 

And the one example you presented fell flat and discredited your assertion when I 
pointed out that it had the conditional OR, which invalidated your claim that 
theft required value.  That was sweet.  ;)

What can I say?  Theft usually DOES involve things of value. Value is not 
necessarily monetary.  Authors, painters, musicians, computer programmers may 
value their work, even if others don't.

 *>I have refuted this micro point, 

Ooops... You forgot to actually refute my point, Cooter.  Back to the drawing 
board.  ;)

 *>thus can construct the next micro point,
 *>and eventually (after many micro points have been fully considered) my full
 *>reasoning will be completely elaborated...

Heh heh!  Earlier you state "In order for a case to to made every micro point 
must be fully considered" and now you claim "(after many micro points have been 
fully considered) my full reasoning will be completely elaborated..."

So... How many micro points are required to make a case?  "Every Micro Point", or 
"Many Micro Points"?

You certainly shoot yourself in the foot often enough.  Aren't you embarrased by 
it?  ;)

 *>Here is the next micro point... Wrong requires a Harmful Effect,

The American Heritage� Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition.   
2000.

wrong: NOUN :
1. a. An unjust or injurious act. 
   b. Something contrary to ethics or morality. 
2. a. An invasion or a violation of another's legal rights.

OK... Those appear to be harmful.

 *>without a harmful effect, Wrong can not occur...

7. Unacceptable or undesirable according to social convention.

Well, laws are social convention.  This doesn't necessarily require harm, that I 
can see.

 *>Try to stay completely focused on this one micro point, 

Perhaps you should spit out your gum.  You don't think well when you have to 
think and chew at the same time.  ;)

 *>and try to stick to reasoning... 

I plan too.  You're evidence that failing to reason just makes you look stupid.  
;)

 *>(you are getting much better at this.)

You would too, if you would stop ignoring your debate opponents points and try to 
move the goal posts.  ;)

Just a few more definitions to make sure we're on the same wavelength.  ;)

theft: NOUN :
1. The act or an instance of stealing; larceny. 

steal: TRANSITIVE VERB :
1. To take (the property of another) without right or permission.
INTRANSITIVE VERB :
1. To commit theft.

larceny: NOUN : The unlawful taking and removing of another's personal property 
with the intent of permanently depriving the owner; theft. 

You contend that value is required for theft.  I have shown that is not required. 

You are now in the absurd position of claiming that there is no value in a 
copyright.

Stick THAT in your micro point and shove it.  ;)
 
 *>>  *>(The point is that value must exist, or theft does not occur)
 *>>
 *>> Uh.. the point that must have slipped past you was the word "or", as in
 *>> "permanently *or* for so extended"
 *>>
 *>> You surely know the meaning of the word, OR, don't you? Only one of those
 *>> conditions has to be met.  Once a thief infringes on a copyright, it IS
 *>> permanent.  Sort of like virginity.  Once lost, you don't get it back
 *>again.  ;)

Try examining this again.  Maybe it will clarify your error.  
 

Vogons For a Turlette Free Apple II Community!

Quantum_Cat