[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Query on Brochu's compromise
----- Original Message -----
From: "chris brochu" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2000 1:04 PM
Subject: Re: Kirkaldy and SVP Ethics Statement
Toward the end of the message Chris Brochu wrote:
> The only solution is to encourage private collectors to work more closely
> with professionals and to help them understand the importance of museum
> collections. If you don't see this as compromise, then I'm sorry.
I am asking the following question not to irritate or annoy or to incite an
argument, but merely in an effort to understand Chris Brochu's position.
Where I come from, a compromise is an agreement between two (or more)
parties with differing positions and desires such that each party gives up
some of the things they want in return for getting some of the other things
they want. Neither party gets all that they want, neither gets none of what
they want, and each party gets about half of what they want. I suspect that
if Chris views this as a compromise, then he views the accessioning of all
scientifically important specimens into museum collections as one of the
things that he gets from the compromise. However, I do not understand what,
if anything, Chris is giving up in return for having the specimens
accessioned into museum collections. Is he giving in to the desires of
amateurs and commercial collectors to collect on private lands? No, at
present in the U.S. they already have that legal right. Is his giving them
respect? I don't know. Can Chris or someone else please clarify for me
how the above-quoted proposal constitutes a compromise?
S. Christopher Bennett, Ph.D.
Asst. Prof. of Basic Sciences
College of Chiropractic
University of Bridgeport
Bridgeport, CT 06601-2449