thread: 2009-07-26 : Very Briefly about Authority
On 2009-07-28, Callan wrote:
No, Vincent, I would have destroyed my own ability to give moment to moment assent, in my own judgement. I draw a line on my behaviour, because frankly, often enough, no one else is powerful enough to do so. I can't rely on just waiting to see if other people seem to accept what I do.
If the prior agreement doesn't come out and bitch slap me, then I am mightier and thus right to do what I did? Might makes right? "Prior agreement didn't stop me - thus everythings fine! I don't have to look at myself and judge, just rely on other peoples judgements!"
No, I would have just defaulted to animal, in my judgement. Getting something past other peoples jugements is not enough - it has to get past my own judgement first. Does the lumpley principle include having to get your own agreement, or does it just involve getting the agreement of others?
In terms of theory, I don't know why if someones effectively blind to a form of 'agreement', that isn't also part of the theory. Maybe not a part you want to talk about right now - but you seem to be arguing that it's impossible - that everyone agrees to the sorts of things you agree to. Which is silly - assuming you eat meat, some people don't agree with eating meat. In terms of agreement and theory related intimately with agreement, someone not finding certain things to be agreement IS part of the theory. A part you might just acknowledge and not want to talk about today, fair enough. But it is a part. Or have you decided you disagree that I disagreed that, in game, you agreed!? My my! That's a curly one.
Note: You edited your post, you cheeky boy! I don't have to cut my crap now? >:)
