><snip>
>
>>Good morning Denis;
>>
>>I can assure you that there are many forms of logic. In reality you as an individual establish or embrace a value system. There are many value systems and what may be of value to one person is not so to another.
>>
>>Value systems come in many flavors such as monistic practices, save the environment, or “dog eat dog”. In the end the individual chooses his/her own value system. Political dictates and the power structure will establish law which you either follow or violate.
>>
>>Some people believe in balance and others maximum profits at any cost. Who is “right”? Would you wish to stamp out anyone who did not believe in your thoughts? As an example it is only “logical” that anyone who wishes to own it all will do anything to satisfy his/her value system. It is all for maximum profits at any cost. So it kills everyone – so what? You want it all. Remember “Queen”, I want it all and I want it now”! Future generations matter little to some and it is all about the next quarters profits or how much of the pie you own.
>>
>>So my point is that logic comes in many flavors. What seems logical might better be called rationalization. That is you qualify and quantify your actions based upon your value system. Not everyone wants balance.
>>
>>Anyway, Happy Friday. Have a good weekend. :)
>
>Hello Tom,
>
>Many flavors of logic???
>
>I'm sure that everyone in the world can agree on some basic principles. Just one thing in particular, Sweatshop, Do you think that somebody would openly say that it's right to exploit children?
>
>I'm sure that this would get a global agreement that it has to be stopped. But there's big $$$$ right there. The problem is not my logic here but a lack of having international laws and people making sure that the laws are applied and just for some to respect some basic principles instead of being in adoration in front of the god of $$$$$$.
>
>I understand what you mean by saying many kinds of logic but there has to be a stop somewhere. Are there still rules or, because of all the forms of logic, is it becoming more and more a free for all society?
>
>Here's one for you. Help me on this one. This is probably one the many forms of logic existing.
>
>In French we say "Les contraires s'attirent" which translates to "Opposites attract" You've already heard that right? But there's also "Qui se ressemble s'assemble" and sorry because I'm not sure for the english equivalent on this one but I'd translate it to "Those that are alike get together"
>
>Just right here one has to be wrong. It's up to you tell me which one should be eliminated in the future.
>
>So, one done, only a gazillion things to solve.
>
>We have to start somewhere ;-D

Denis;

I wish we were talking in person as this form of “communication” leaves much to be desired! :)

Think of power structure – “might makes” right and other terms that go along with it. Children and adults have been and will be exploited in one way or another. Even laws do not stop exploitation. Society may not care about exploitation and then again it may.

Take a concept of Friedrich Nietzsche concerning laws: “Laws are made by the weak to protect them from the strong”. Observe the life of rich individuals like Andrew Carnegie, who may have looked as if they were benevolent and caring, while the opposite was true.

Exploitation of Chinese workers is one issue. China has one free source of labor – from its citizens who are incrassated. It is hard to compete with free labor.

Does the board of directors or investors care about ethics when profits are the topic? Only if the government catches them breaking the law. Then it is time to send in another round of “Lobbyists” , pay off a few political figures and judges, then all is well.

"Opposites attract" and “birds of a feather flock together” seem to be in conflict. However, it is up to the individual to decide which applies. Both, one or the other or none may be correct. It depends upon the individuals concerned. Few things are absolute. Like the joke, “Nothing is absolute. Absolutely”!

If two people are tolerant and opposite they can get along very well. In such a case differences form a means of attraction. With a group being similar will help prevent friction. In this case sameness may be a physical, emotional, philosophical or any number of items that two or more people are in agreement with.

Sometimes the media or individuals take up a cause – we have had our share in the San Francisco Bay Area – perhaps more than anywhere else on the face of the Earth, during the last 40 years. Something that seems acceptable here is out of touch with the Mid West. Laws and the attitudes of people can be very different.

What seems” correct” today is interpreted differently in different places for political and other reasons. There is no one-way of thinking that is acceptable which will rule the minds and hearts of mankind. You may think that all people should be treated with kindness and respect while someone else thinks the opposite. Who is correct? Who is not correct? Is this a value judgment? What means is being used to make such a decision?

Tom