Message-ID: <152306Z03101994@anon.penet.fi>
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!MathWorks.Com!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!anon.penet.fi
Newsgroups: comp.ai.fuzzy
From: an125600@anon.penet.fi (H.C.C)
X-Anonymously-To: comp.ai.fuzzy
Organization: Anonymous contact service
Reply-To: an125600@anon.penet.fi
Date: Mon,  3 Oct 1994 15:16:56 UTC
Subject: Re: fuzzy logic and ethics
Lines: 58

In article <36n7k2$kak@news.cerf.net> libgold1@nic.cerf.net (LA Public Library - F.H. Goldwyn) writes:
>Path: ousrvr.oulu.fi!news.funet.fi!sunic!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!news.cerf.net!nic.cerf.net!libgold1
>From: libgold1@nic.cerf.net (LA Public Library - F.H. Goldwyn)
>Newsgroups: comp.ai.fuzzy
>Subject: fuzzy logic and ethics
>Date: 2 Oct 1994 21:10:26 GMT
>Organization: CERFnet Dial n' CERF CustomerKeywords:
>Lines: 25
>Distribution: usa
>Message-ID: <36n7k2$kak@news.cerf.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: nic.cerf.net


>Cc: 

>        Just as the concept of relativity in the first part of
>this century influenced the humanities, or to give a different
>example, how Aristotle unintentionallly influenced religious
>thought (Aquinas and Maimonides), are the basic concepts that
>underly Fuzzy logic having a crossover affect and influencing
>philosophical thinking, especially regarding ethics. We have
>basic ethical systems that operate at polarities, guilt and
>innocence, true and false, premeditated and meditated acts,
>etc. Although, degree, valence, scale do play a part, the
>traditional basis for law, ethics, social responsibility
>remains basically bi-polar. Do we ever measure how guilty
>someone is? How insane was he when he murdered his wife?
>The Nazi regime misused anthropological theories to support
>their master race theory. the soviets bent Lamarck's 
>evolutionary speculation to coincide with the Communist
>dialectic. Fuzzy logic is a useful thing, but can we prevent
>this kind of crossover thinking, or should we? Am I barking
>up the wrong tree? Would appreciate comments.

>-- 
>libgold1

libgold1 wrote about influence of f.l. to our ethics:

>... can we prevent this kind of crossover thinking, or should we? ...

Is it not so that fuzzy logic lends itself poorly for evil intentions? In 
all cases I do recall (after 10 s of hard concentration) the fuzziness of 
things is usually denied by the bad guys.

"You are either our side or their side. You either believe or not. You are 
either black or white. You are either Jew or non-Jew."

In my opinion our ethics might need a little bit of fuzzification.

Do you people in there come up with possible ways to misuse fuzzy thinking?


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help@anon.penet.fi.
Due to the double-blind, any mail replies to this message will be anonymized,
and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.
Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin@anon.penet.fi.
