[310] in libertarians
Re: Someone really did make a complaint "MIT policy is harassment itself"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Vernon Imrich)
Thu Oct 13 14:38:19 1994
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 94 14:32:10 -0400
From: vimrich@flying-cloud.mit.edu (Vernon Imrich)
To: safe@MIT.EDU, sethf@MIT.EDU
Cc: libertarians@MIT.EDU
[from the MIT response to the harassment policy objection]
> and to recognize that with rights come
>responsibilities. The balancing of interests inevitably leads to
>constraints on individuals; such, often, is the nature of social
>contracts.
I love this paragraph (tactically speaking). The word "responsibilities"
is loaded. Does it mean responsibility in the sense of "accountability,"
or in the sense of "obligation?"
Clearly, the local context, of responsibility paired to rights, appeals
to the popular sense that people should be accountable for their actions,
i.e. free to choose but held responsible for the consequences. This gives
the phrasing its "common sense" appeal. The larger context of the section,
however, shows the word is used in its entirely different connotation,
imputing obligation. Read that way, the section says that rights, of all
things, make us debtors to the rest of society.
This is deceptive genius. Under the definition of malapropism is the
description, "the use of a word sounding somewhat like the one intended
but ludicrously wrong in context" (Archie Bunker was the king of malaprops
such as "Right there in the Book of Generous..." refering to the Bible).
This example is close to being a "phrasing malaprop" in which an entire
phrase ("rights come with responisibilities") is used in ludicrously wrong
context. Unfortuantely, its a pretty sick joke.
Vernon
P.S. There may be a letter forming in this diatribe...
