Brain-damaged woman at center of Wal-Mart suit

[vern_humphrey]

It is a tool to get more dollars.
One can no more apply altruistic traits to it then they could altruistic traits to a hammer.

If that is true, then neither can one condemn a corporation – anymore than one could condemn a hammer for hitting your thumb.

But corporations are run by people. And there are good and bad people (and a lot of in-betweens.) And one can tell a good deal about the people who run corporations by what the corporations do.

Wal-Mart is a good neighbor and a good citizen.

I would feel bad…but then again, I am human.

Who was it that said, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you?”

 

[wabrams]

As much proof as has been offered that these are for altruistic reasons.

But that misses the point.

The point is that you cannot take any of these actions and automatically declare the corporate entity altruistic.

Otherwards, you just make stuff up as you go and it’s alright if you don’t the like the person or company you are trashing.

 

[vz71]

Otherwards, you just make stuff up as you go and it’s alright if you don’t the like the person or company you are trashing.

Man did I ruffle a feather…
Perhaps you should reread the posts that quote is related to.

You will see that the characteristics you appear to attribute me simply are not there.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

As much proof as has been offered that these are for altruistic reasons.

But that misses the point.

The point is that you cannot take any of these actions and automatically declare the corporate entity altruistic.

Just as you can not take these actions and automatically declare that the corporate entity (eg the people who made this decision) made this decision for some reason other than it was the right thing to do.

 

[vz71]

Just as you can not take these actions and automatically declare that the corporate entity (eg the people who made this decision) made this decision for some reason other than it was the right thing to do.

Sure I can.
I know the purpose for which this entity was created.
Anything less then consideration of the bottom line in the motivations of the entity is a distortion of its purpose.

I can look at every action it takes and assume a motivation of profit for the shareholders because that is what it was designed and built for.

Were you discussing actions of a human being, the circumstances would be changed, and you would have a point.
But as it sits, corporate entities are being discussed.
It is a tool. Not a human.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Sure I can.
I know the purpose for which this entity was created.
Anything less then consideration of the bottom line in the motivations of the entity is a distortion of its purpose.

I can look at every action it takes and assume a motivation of profit for the shareholders because that is what it was designed and built for.

Not according to the teachings of the Catholic Church you can’t.

Were you discussing actions of a human being, the circumstances would be changed, and you would have a point.
But as it sits, corporate entities are being discussed.
It is a tool. Not a human.

With out people there is no corporate entity. A corporation makes no decisions apart from the actual people who make them.

 

[vz71]

Not according to the teachings of the Catholic Church you can’t.

The CCC makes no stipulation concerning a requirement to assume the best intentions from tools.

With out people there is no corporate entity. A corporation makes no decisions apart from the actual people who make them.

That may very well be.
But this corporate entity is a seperate entity from these people.
The corporation is a tool - not a person.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Sure I can.

But not in keeping with your Catholic duties – “Judge not, lest ye be judged.” Especially if ye judge based on prejudice.

I know the purpose for which this entity was created.
Anything less then consideration of the bottom line in the motivations of the entity is a distortion of its purpose.

By that standard, all corporations are the same. And so are all individuals who work for a living.

I can look at every action it takes and assume a motivation of profit for the shareholders because that is what it was designed and built for.

And someone could look at you and at every action you take and assume a motivation of profit.

Were you discussing actions of a human being, the circumstances would be changed, and you would have a point.
But as it sits, corporate entities are being discussed.
It is a tool. Not a human.

No. The circumstances are not changed. Corporations are run by human beings, and they don’t become a different species when they become corporate officers. They – individually and collectively – are entitled to be judged by the same standards you would wish to be judged by.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

That may very well be.
But this corporate entity is a seperate entity from these people.
The corporation is a tool - not a person.

And yet a tool can make no decisions nor can it have motivations.

When you speak of decisions and motivations you are speaking of the people.

But then you may rationalize in this way to allow you to do as you do but I refuse to do so and I will point out when others do this as I am doing now with you.

 

[vern_humphrey]

And yet a tool can make no decisions nor can it have motivations.

When you speak of decisions and motivations you are speaking of the people.

And that should be absolutely crystal clear. The corporation management – human beings – decide what the corportion does. The corporation by itself has no thinking process or ability to act.

But then you may rationalize in this way to allow you to do as you do but I refuse to do so and I will point out when others do this as I am doing now with you.

Let us remember, “Judge not, lest ye be judged.”

 

[vz71]

And yet a tool can make no decisions nor can it have motivations.

Having worked as long as I have around computers, I can assure you that some of the tools man makes can make decisions.

But that also misses the point.
The corporate entity is not run by any individual.
It is run by majority decision as well as a complex list of SOP’s designed to maximize profit.

 

[vz71]

When you speak of decisions and motivations you are speaking of the people.

No.
I speak of the decisions arrived at through the complex processes outlined in the rules and procedures Wal Mart has.
Not the people that are working in it.

There seems to be a stubborn unwillingness to seperate out the people in a system from the system itself.
Why is that?

 

[vz71]

By that standard, all corporations are the same. And so are all individuals who work for a living.

All corporations are the same…different businesses, different processes, the same designed purpose…profit for the shareholders.

Individuals however are human. Not the same.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Having worked as long as I have around computers, I can assure you that some of the tools man makes can make decisions.

This says it all. As a computer programmer, systems administrator, and information security specialist, I can speak as an expert when I tell you that you are wrong when you say this.

A computer does not make any decisions. The computer programmer has to make all the decisions before hand and program them into the computer, if the programmer has not anticipated something then the computer can not do it.

This shows a great flaw in your thought process.

But that also misses the point.
The corporate entity is not run by any individual.
It is run by majority decision as well as a complex list of SOP’s designed to maximize profit.

It is not run by any individual but an individual has to make a decision, yes some can be done by many individuals together but still an individual is involved. As someone who wrote SOP’s I can tell you that they do not just evolve, they are written by people and people chose to follow them or not.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

No.
I speak of the decisions arrived at through the complex processes outlined in the rules and procedures Wal Mart has.
Not the people that are working in it.

There seems to be a stubborn unwillingness to seperate out the people in a system from the system itself.
Why is that?

Why is that? It is because a “system” makes no decisions, people do. People chose to follow it or not, People make the “system”. The bottom line is that people are doing this not some “system”.

It is just easier for some people to lose sight of this and blame the “system”. It makes it easier for some people to do wrong things because it was the “system” and not them.

 

[vz71]

This says it all. As a computer programmer, systems administrator, and information security specialist, I can speak as an expert when I tell you that you are wrong when you say this.

A computer does not make any decisions. The computer programmer has to make all the decisions before hand and program them into the computer, if the programmer has not anticipated something then the computer can not do it.

This shows a great flaw in your thought process.

I see.
So every unexpected problem arising from a computer program was intentional.

Don’t try to sell me that bill of goods again.
The credentials you tout tell me that you should know full well your statement is not always the case.

This shows a great flaw in your thought process.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

All corporations are the same…different businesses, different processes, the same designed purpose…profit for the shareholders.

Individuals however are human. Not the same.

This case we are discussing shows how wrong you are.

In this case a person along the way decided that something was wrong with the way Wal-Mart was handling this case. Some one in authority decided that Wal-Mart would part from its processes and SOP’s to do the right thing.

You can not judge the intentions/motivations of these people, which you are doing.

And after working in the corporate world I can tell you that not all corporations are the same either.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I see.
So every unexpected problem arising from a computer program was intentional.

Don’t try to sell me that bill of goods again.
The credentials you tout tell me that you should know full well your statement is not always the case.

This shows a great flaw in your thought process.

Did I say that unexpected problems are intentional? No, if a computer could make decisions then there would be no unexpected problems as the computer could decide to do something. But as this is not the truth in the matter, it can not do so.

I have had to clean up many messes because a programmer did not anticipate something, but that does not mean a computer can make decisions. It is a glorified calculator, it can only do what it is told, to think otherwise shows a grave misunderstanding of technology and nature.

But I see that this is a lost cause and it is worthless to continue on with you. I will pray for you and I ask for your prayers.

 

[vern_humphrey]

All corporations are the same…different businesses, different processes, the same designed purpose…profit for the shareholders.

Individuals however are human. Not the same.

And corporations are simply collections of individuals – who make the rules, make the decisions, and can for good reason over-ride their own rules.

Or would you say we were wrong when we sent corporate executives to prison for various crimes they committed? Perhaps the Nazi and Japanese generals and politicians should have not have been held responsible for their crimes?

 

[vz71]

This says it all. As a computer programmer, systems administrator, and information security specialist, I can speak as an expert when I tell you that you are wrong when you say this.

A computer does not make any decisions. The computer programmer has to make all the decisions before hand and program them into the computer, if the programmer has not anticipated something then the computer can not do it.

Did I say that unexpected problems are intentional? No, if a computer could make decisions then there would be no unexpected problems as the computer could decide to do something. But as this is not the truth in the matter, it can not do so.

I have had to clean up many messes because a programmer did not anticipate something, but that does not mean a computer can make decisions. It is a glorified calculator, it can only do what it is told, to think otherwise shows a grave misunderstanding of technology and nature.

Oh make up your mind.
Either the computer makes unexpected decisions based upon the rules outlined by the programmer, or it does not.
You can’t have it both ways.

The credentials you tout tell me that you should know better then that.

A computer is designed to decide.
The programmer does not plug through every possible decision and tell it what to do in every instance. He builds rules and lets the machine decide based upon the rules.
All too often, BSOD’s or worse result when the programmer loses track of rules overlapping other rules.

But this strays from the topic. I have shown a tool that makes decisions. And that was all that was necessary.