http://theinnovationist.com/2008/10/3-laws-of-honorable-humans/ Irregular Ideas on Business, Philosophy, and Tech Wed, 29 Feb 2012 13:58:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 http://theinnovationist.com/2008/10/3-laws-of-honorable-humans/comment-page-1/#comment-33 james Mon, 24 Nov 2008 03:13:17 +0000 http://theinnovationist.com/?p=271#comment-33 Hello Dan, I see your point. Though I feel an honorable person would have his rights presented by the Zeroth law to protect humanity as a whole by defending himself against an irrational being contented to harm humanity. Hello Dan, I see your point. Though I feel an honorable person would have his rights presented by the Zeroth law to protect humanity as a whole by defending himself against an irrational being contented to harm humanity.

]]> http://theinnovationist.com/2008/10/3-laws-of-honorable-humans/comment-page-1/#comment-364 James Fuller Mon, 24 Nov 2008 03:13:00 +0000 http://theinnovationist.com/?p=271#comment-364 Hello Dan, I see your point. Though I feel an honorable person would have his rights presented by the Zeroth law to protect humanity as a whole by defending himself against an irrational being contented to harm humanity. Hello Dan, I see your point. Though I feel an honorable person would have his rights presented by the Zeroth law to protect humanity as a whole by defending himself against an irrational being contented to harm humanity.

]]> http://theinnovationist.com/2008/10/3-laws-of-honorable-humans/comment-page-1/#comment-32 Dan Sun, 23 Nov 2008 23:56:35 +0000 http://theinnovationist.com/?p=271#comment-32 Interesting idea, but I would change the third one. The way it's written currently, an "honorable human" would be expected, when attacked by another person, to allow the other person to kill him/her rather than defend him/herself, or they would be expected to jump off a bridge if told to. Interesting idea, but I would change the third one. The way it’s written currently, an “honorable human” would be expected, when attacked by another person, to allow the other person to kill him/her rather than defend him/herself, or they would be expected to jump off a bridge if told to.

]]> http://theinnovationist.com/2008/10/3-laws-of-honorable-humans/comment-page-1/#comment-363 Dan Sun, 23 Nov 2008 23:56:00 +0000 http://theinnovationist.com/?p=271#comment-363 Interesting idea, but I would change the third one. The way it's written currently, an "honorable human" would be expected, when attacked by another person, to allow the other person to kill him/her rather than defend him/herself, or they would be expected to jump off a bridge if told to. Interesting idea, but I would change the third one. The way it’s written currently, an “honorable human” would be expected, when attacked by another person, to allow the other person to kill him/her rather than defend him/herself, or they would be expected to jump off a bridge if told to.

]]>