From: Harvey Newstrom (mail@HarveyNewstrom.com)
Date: Sun Jun 08 2003 - 19:44:47 MDT
MaxPlumm@aol.com wrote,
> In regards to the other odious regimes, they merely serve
> to illustrate the fact that Damien somehow approves of a
> world and moral view in which a despot may deliberately
> murder or destroy hundreds of thousands to millions of
> people, but the West may not inadvertently kill hundreds
> to remove said despot.
This is still misleading. The fact that Damien has not commented on these
other regimes does not imply that he supports them. This is unreasonable
binary thinking. You can't accuse everybody of every sin that they haven't
publically denied.
> > Please illuminate for those of us not occupying your higher
> > plain of logic and reasoning specifically why it is
> > inappropriate, or an "oversimplification" to list the Saddam
> > Hussein regime amongst a "them" list of similar murderous and
> > barbaric tyrants ranging from Hitler to Mengistu Haile Mariam.
As I have explained before, you are over-simplifying. You are classifying
dissimilar enemies into a single group called "them." Combining communists,
socialist, Nazis, terrorists and radical Muslims into a single group makes
it very difficult to discuss motives, methods, goals, and possible future
actions of this "group." It would be much more accurate to describe each
group separately and only attribute motives to the groups to which they
belong. This is a classical logical fallacy.
> Since it is apparent you are more than willing to share your
> ever cogent and not the slightest bit pretentious insights with
> us, Mr. Newstrom, humbly request that you tell me how my "position"
> as an anti-communist (indeed, everyone's favorite at that) is so flawed.
>
> "This is the oversimplification I am talking about. Where in the world
> did you get the idea that I thought your anti-communist position was
flawed?"
>
> Hmm, let us return to your original post to me:
> "I also noted that the previous note somehow was connected with
> anti-communism AND (emphasis added) several other binary us vs.
> them worldviews." You directly state that anti-communism is a
> subset of binary "us vs them" worldviews.
No. I am saying that your lumping all these things together is
oversimplified, binary and illogical. I am not saying that anti-communism
itself is oversimplified, binary, or illogical. I am not saying that any of
these individual beliefs is oversimplified, binary or illogical.
> Given these concise observations, one must draw the conclusion
> that you consider binary worldviews flawed, or incorrect. Since
> you directly assert that anti-communism is a binary worldview,
> the negative implications of your comments are obvious.
No. Your logic is flawed. You must not draw that conclusion. It is false.
-- Harvey Newstrom, CISM, CISSP, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC Certified InfoSec Manager, Certified IS Security Pro, NSA-certified InfoSec Assessor, IBM-certified Security Consultant, SANS-cert GSEC <HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jun 08 2003 - 19:56:01 MDT