LAST EDITED ON Dec-22-04 AT 09:29 PM (EDT)
 
not that i don't agree, in part, but it's funny to me to
read so much about people taking personal responsibility but
yet there is nothing said about a company taking
responsibility for the quality of it's services.

Absolutely there is, but me spilling something on myself has nothing to do with the quality of any product or service.

let's say i am touching something in a display and it falls
on me. if i am encouraged to touch it but at the same time,
it is a heavy objects, high up and is not secured, then i
don't believe it is entirely my fault for it to fall. there
is a measure of quality in the display that is expected.

Apples to oranges comparison. The store is creating an unsafe situation by improperly securing a heavy object in a location where it is known that people will fuck with it. It is also not known by the person fucking with it that it's improperly secured. Everyone knows coffee is hot.

you could say that without a sign saying the floor is wet
you should know the floor could be wet by looking at it. if
you slip, then it's your fault, you should have looked where
you we're going.

Ideally yes, however it is not often apparent that floors are wet, especially tile floors that are waxed and shiny to begin with. However, the biggest factor in this situation is that the interior of a store is a controlled environment. If the staff is aware of the hazard, doesn't mark the area and doesn't clean it up, they are contributing to the hazard.

is there no a level of reasonable expectation? aren't there
a large number of products that have been improved or taken
off the market because people complained or went so far as
to sue over it.

Sure, many products have, and the ones that have been pulled as a result of lawsuits were generally unsafe due to the method of manufacture. If a car with the gas tank in the rear explodes every time it's rear ended, that's a manufacturing defect, not a result of improper use or failure to pay attention to what you're doing.

olestra gives you the runs but maybe you don't need a label
saying it does because it's a chemical and chemicals don't
work well in the human body but at the same time you have a
reasonable expectation that something would have a warning
on it if it was going to give you "loose stool".

To my knowledge olestra has been removed from the market, but I don't think anyone sued over it. The companies that used it may have put a label on the products simply to avoid the hassle of complaints and possible lawsuits. If you eat something with a warning label without reading it first and then get the shits, that's your fault, too.

why is something unexpectedly too hot an exception?

One, because there was nothing inherently wrong with the product. It was hot coffee, served hot. Two, the business has absolutely no control over what you do with the product once you leave the store with it. If you could sue over an accident with hot coffee, by the same logic you could sue Makita if you cut your finger off with a power saw. The product was functioning exactly as it should, you just happened to have an accident due to your own carelessness. Hot liquids are dangerous just as power tools are dangerous and each should be handled with a modicum of caution.