I see it as a conflict between an Aristotelian view and an Operational one:
A: A Person "IS" something by definition.
O: A Person ACTED a cetain way at one point in time.

The Operational view is more accurate and scientific, it avoids prejudice and stereotyping because it focuses on what is measurable. ie.: How can you say a person "IS" un-trustworthy? You can look into the past and measure how many times they were un-trustworthy in similar situations, but that does not take into account what the person might have changed about their personality in the meantime. According to Aristotelian "ghost in the machine" logic, you should be able to divine some ineffable "trustworthiness" essence within the person; but it wouldn't be measurable.

Therefore, I think Merlyn is speaking Operationally, whereas Delerium has taken it as Aristotelian.


The Map is not the territory. The Menu is not the Meal.