[sigh] I just know I shouldn't reply to this... I have work to do...
At 05:16 PM 13/09/2001 -0400, Mitchell, Jerry (3337) wrote:
>Lovely, wave been reduced to the insane point now where our philosophy is to
>disavow philosophy. Our ideals are that we hold no ideals. The philosophy
>that philosophy doesn't matter could only be grasped by brutes. They focus
>on the concrete and forgo the conceptual level. Exactly how do you define
>human life as a value without a philosophy when its philosophy that tells
>you what IS in fact valuable? You cannot escape the requirement to possess
>one... what you can do is default on your requirement for a rational
>philosophy and just drift where the winds take you. This is the most
>commonly chosen path. This is why someone with a integrated view of reality
>seems so alien or dare I use the word "radical".
Ideas that matter more than people are not worth holding. Philosophies that
let you consider people en-masse and minimise their humanity lead to
atrocities. The destruction of the poor souls at the WTC shows that clearly.
I don't have convictions in the normal sense.
For me, life is valued above all else, next most important to me is
intelligence, and the third thing I hold dear is knowledge.
I start from these simply because it seems to me the most logical thing to
do. I don't believe in moral absolutes. I see punishment as sometimes
"working", but other times counterproductive. Everything is evaluated in my
eyes by how it can enhance life, intelligence, and knowledge. Calling for
senseless revenge pretty clearly runs counter to all three. I won't repeat
the reasons. [sigh]
>This isn't at all what history has shown. Where were all the terrorist from
>Japan, Germany, or Korea? Historical precedence says that when a country is
>beaten down, for the most part, they shut up.
True, but you are wanting to fight a totally different beast here. This is
no simple, centralised monster. This something that if you lop off one head
many more spring up to take its place. A different tactic is called for.
This is more like the war with Vietnam.
>Damn strait I'm a fanatic for liberty and proud of it. Ill fight to the
>death to preserve it as well, for myself and my children.
Unfortunately it looks like you will just be guaranteeing that your
children will have to deal with the fallout from your desire for simple
>I'm sure everyone here that's spouting against violence feels morally smug
>thinking there's never a time for violence.
Of course there is a time for violence. But it is just not *always*
productive, and certainly shouldn't be the standard kneejerk response.
>I for one think that people that
>don't have the strength to define a philosophy and defend it are moral
>cowards. I for one don't agree with the philosophy of the middle east, but
>at least they have the balls to have one. There is no way that man can exist
>without an integrated world view... a philosophy. This moral agnosticism is
>worse by far though. At least their view has a relationship to reality...
>their wrong. The fog of the unknowable ether inhabited by the anti-idealist
>has no relationship to anything. Its free to twist, contort, and dispense
>with its views at whim. The misguided Arabs will eventually have the
>possibility to correct their thinking by correlating it with reality, there
>will be no such chance for the anti-idealist.
Oh great. Calling for thoughtful, measured response that takes into account
past and future actions makes me more reprehensible than the dumb shits who
altered your skyline so dramatically by succumbing to the illusion of quick
fix via violence. :-(
Jerry, it feels strange to hear you aligning yourself with the fanatics
while denouncing someone who would like to find long-term solutions to this
cycle of spilt blood.
Q. What is the similarity between an elephant and a grape?
A. They are both purple... except for the elephant.
Virtual Reality Association http://www.vr.org.au
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:45 MDT