[Foundation-l] Mission & Vision statement updated

[Rich Holton]

Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> The essence of straw man arguments is to propose a situation that is
>> ridiculously unlikely (like the caviar charity), and proceed to use
>> arguments against it to serve in more sensible circumstances.
>> Converting a charity established to cure lung cancer into one that
>> treats emphysema would be a more likely situation.
> 
> That's entirely subjective though. Why are emphysema patients more
> deserving of treatment than aristocrats are deserving of caviar?
> Purely because of your values. Determining if something is charitable
> should be an objective exercise, otherwise it doesn't work.
> 
Huh?
Why would making this decision based on values make "it" not work? Or 
are you meaning that the values should be objectively defined and evaluated?

"Emphysema patients are more deserving of charitable assistance than 
caviar-less aristocrats." is a statement of values.

"Caviar is defined as a luxury, and an organization dedicated to 
providing it does not qualify for charitable status." is a value-based 
statement that is objectively applicable.