Archive through September 19, 2002
TV ClubHouse: Archive: Iraq will allow full weapons inspection!!!!! (ARCHIVE):
Archive through September 19, 2002
Karuuna | Tuesday, September 17, 2002 - 02:27 pm     Hillbilly, if you are interested in reading more, there's a wonderful book called "The Unquiet Ghost" that details Stalin's regime. It's probably the best work I've read on the subject. |
Hillbilly | Tuesday, September 17, 2002 - 02:30 pm     I'm interested..do you have an author's name? |
Karuuna | Tuesday, September 17, 2002 - 02:31 pm     I'll look it up for you when I get home! |
Faerygdds | Tuesday, September 17, 2002 - 02:38 pm     Karuuna.. I had a similar experience... I was staying in West Berlin... we went by duty train to Paris France... when we crossed the Iron curtain I dared to take 2 pictures not knowing any better. When the train stopped, my cousin told be to "burn the roll" I got a few great shots of her pick socked feet. We then took the film out of the camera and replaced it with a new roll by the time the guards got to our cabin. They checked my camera and noticed the roll was new and that I had to get it out from a very difficult place, so they let me keep my camera and it's new roll of film... and I got my 2 pictures! |
Azriel | Tuesday, September 17, 2002 - 05:32 pm     1a. - I would never consider a person evil. Not even Hitler. (Hold those tomatoes!) As long as y'all are reading, you might try reading a wonderful work by German psychiatrist Alice Miller (and the name escapes me at the moment, but I'll look it up later); who analyzes Hitler's youth, and explains his later behavior in that context. I don't need to analyze Hitler or Hussein's childhood. It's irrelevant, in this context, as far as I'm concerned. I've seen the atrocities that they have committed. There is undisputable documented evidence of their crimes against humanity. I agree with Hillbilly, Hussein is Evil with a capitol E. I don't know when or where in his life that his mind got screwed up, but I know without a doubt that he needs to be taken out of power before he achieves even greater infamy than Hitler. |
Twiggyish | Tuesday, September 17, 2002 - 06:34 pm     Faery and Kar, I had to teach tonight, so couldn't stay. You didn't insult me. (Oh believe me, I normally love a good debate!) However, this debate is particularly difficult, as I cannot think of Saddam, as anything but truly evil. |
Whowhere | Wednesday, September 18, 2002 - 05:40 am     The Unquiet Ghost: Russians Remember Stalin by: Adam Hochschild |
Nimtu | Wednesday, September 18, 2002 - 07:31 am     Well, I just read this entire thread...thought on all viewpoints for sometime..attempted to lower my blood pressure prior to posting - hopefully I will have been successful. The question of Evil is subjective. Those who have suffered or have descended from those who suffered at the hands of Hitler or Stalin must look toward some rational for the horror of it. Those who participated or descended from those who participated must also look for the same rational - their conclusions will be different. Genocide, in any form, whether practiced by Hitler or Saddam is a horror, morally wrong, driven by hate and in my opinion the very definition of Evil. Hitler rose to power in a time that was ripe both economically and philosophically for his passionate ideology to be embraced by a people looking to overcome the effects of WWI. They looked for who to cast blame on - and found a leader who directed them. Hitler was not a bright man. He was at best a below average student and his true strength was in his ability to espouse his passionate hatred at the right time. To compare Bush to Hitler or Republicans to Nazis is absurd. Bush wants to control Saddam's ability to use or provide weapons of mass destruction - he is not attempting to take over the world or destroy an entire race or races of human beings. As long as we are sharing recommended reading please consider reading the book: Night by Elie Wiesel - I don't think the word evil is mentioned once, however, you may just feel the presence of something that comes pretty close (for those who don't believe evil exists) |
Abbynormal | Wednesday, September 18, 2002 - 08:32 am     Good thread. Can I just add my very very simple statement on evil. I know a man who owns a restaurant who will throw away untouched pans of food daily. He states he will throw it away before he lets his employees have it or even buy it. I have always wanted him to call the local nursing home or shelter and offer the extra food. I would even deliver it, or I'm sure they would be so thankful they would pick it up. I'm talking tons of food here. To not be charitable toward another human when it is easily in your grasp, is unforgivable to me. I guess the clincher is he is proud of his actions, laughs about it, and sees nothing wrong with it. In my world, he's evil. |
Gentoo | Wednesday, September 18, 2002 - 08:08 pm     There is no such thing as good, nor evil. Just selfishness. Good and evil are nothing but predescribed social norms and empathy towards others. Social norms are followed because we want to look good to others and feel important, or at least accepted. Empathy is entirely due to seeing oneself in another. Its why we feel worse when humans are killed when they are similar to us, by bloodline, race or whatever, and when they are connected to us in some way... when they are more than a number or a demonified out group (like those damn *fill in the blank*s). Its also why we feel better killing insects than reptiles, reptiles than mammals, and humans than other mammals. As smug and self-important as proclaimed morality make make us feel, that is its only truth. It helps us function in society, keeps social control and harmony strong, and for the most part makes us stronger. And for all the bible thumper or sheeple types out there... "Morality" as adherence to a set of principles handed down by our forefathers, or proclaimed Gods, is nothing more than obedience. And if obedience to one's forfathers' or one's perceived God's will is the definition of good, then the destruction of the World Trade Centre was a good act. |
Twiggyish | Wednesday, September 18, 2002 - 08:16 pm     Gentoo..(shaking head), You just have all the answers right there in your post. baaa baaaa |
Faerygdds | Wednesday, September 18, 2002 - 08:43 pm     Thank you for your opinion Gentoo... and that's why.... the only difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist is PERSPECTIVE! Although... I'm not sure I would have put it that same way you did.. I agree... |
Twiggyish | Wednesday, September 18, 2002 - 08:53 pm     When I read a post filled with generalizations and stereotypes, it makes me cringe. How do you address someone who obviously has no respect for other belief systems? |
Faerygdds | Wednesday, September 18, 2002 - 08:55 pm     Simple Twiggy... because I respect HIS beliefs... just as I respect YOUR beliefs... |
Twiggyish | Wednesday, September 18, 2002 - 09:00 pm     I'm not saying you Faery. I can't respect an opinion that completely picks apart other beliefs. There are so many generalizations in Gentoo's post, that it'd start another huge debate here, if anyone tried to address them. The perception of good and evil has a lot to do with perception. However, the rest of that post above, by Gentoo, is full of generalizations. (for lack of a better word) |
Faerygdds | Wednesday, September 18, 2002 - 10:00 pm     OK... this is actually keeping me from sleeping because it bothers me SO much... so I feel I need to reply to you Twiggy. Please keep in mind that you know me well enough to know that I respect everyone's opinions, but I am primarily a logic based human.... and this is just eating at me, so if you get offended... it is NOT my intention... K? << I can't respect an opinion that completely picks apart other beliefs. >> OK.. this in itself is a hypocritical statement. You are BASICALLY saying that because you don't agree with Gentoo that he is picking apart your beliefs and therefore you cannot repsect him... so... in essence.. aren't you doing the SAME thing you are accusing him of??? <<There are so many generalizations in Gentoo's post, that it'd start another huge debate here, if anyone tried to address them. >> I re-read Gentoo's post. I don't see any generalizations... I see where he uses logic and psychological truths about us as humans to explain his postion on good and evil, but I don't see the same generalizations as you do. I can therefore only ASSUME (and yes.. I know that's a bad thing) that this is the statement that got you upset... And for all the bible thumper or sheeple types out there... "Morality" as adherence to a set of principles handed down by our forefathers, or proclaimed Gods, is nothing more than obedience. And if obedience to one's forfathers' or one's perceived God's will is the definition of good, then the destruction of the World Trade Centre was a good act. Am I right??? As horrible as you may think the sentiment is... it does ring of truth if you take it from a logical and EMPATHETIC viewpiont. *I* think the WTC was a tragedy, but to those who DID it... it was an obedient act of faith to their God within the confines of their beliefs. Does that make sense??? Does that mean I LIKE their beliefs??? Of course not, but I do RESPECT their beliefs because they are their personal beliefs and therefore, for them they are not wrong-- after all, killing all those people was supposed to gain the approvel of their God and admit them into their "heaven". I'm not sure how to explain it any better than that... I'm not even sure that I'm making myself clear. I just know that the statement you made about not respecting Gentoo's opinion has really disturbed me (not upset me, but disturbed). Maybe I can sleep now that I got that off my chest... I'll check back in the morning... FaeryGdds |
Hillbilly | Thursday, September 19, 2002 - 03:25 am     Faery...for me the offensive part of the post was the name calling...'bible thumpers'...'sheeple' While I don't agree with Paganism ..and certainly have an opinion about it..I didn't call you all the stereotypical names that you yourself have claimed to have been called by others. I tried to respect you and your choice of beliefs or philosopy. Calling Christians 'bible thumpers' is clearly used as a stereotypical derogatory remark on someone else choice of religion and, in my experience, is usually intended to be condescending. Gentoo could have simply called us 'Christians'. The post was clearly disrespectful to anyone who adheres to the Christian doctrine. So I agree with Twiggy. If Gentoo wants others to respect his/her opinion or religion that he needs to give that same respect to others. When I see people who post like that, I usually discount anything said because the people are obviously prejudice and it makes their argument void. |
Magikearth | Thursday, September 19, 2002 - 03:41 am     Okay...stepping in this thread here.. I totally agree with Twiggy. Gentoo's post was judgemental and condescending talking about "Bible Thumpers" and "sheep"-just like you wouldn't like it if someone called you a "tree worshipper",Faery.You don't win points or show other people a different way of thinking if you have to resort to offending them like that. And anyone who's "Religion" included the slaughter of 3,000 innocent lives,I can't see how anyone could respect that "belief system". Guess I'm not so open-minded because I'd never defend nor respect that belief. Off to work now. Just had to address this. |
Magikearth | Thursday, September 19, 2002 - 03:46 am     I was posting at the same time Hillbilly was and just saw his post.I totally agree with him and thought he articulated very well what I was trying to say. Great post,Hillbilly! Now I really am off to work! |
Hillbilly | Thursday, September 19, 2002 - 03:53 am     "As smug and self-important as proclaimed morality make make us feel, that is its only truth. It helps us function in society, keeps social control and harmony strong, and for the most part makes us stronger. " This statement is also what I would call a VERY broad generalization. It would seem to imply that anyone who believes in morality is smug and self-important. I can name one excellent example of a person (I could name many) who believed in morality....Mother Teresa. Funny...I wonder if she ever realized that she was smug and self-important. I'm sure she just thought she was trying to help others. People who believe in morality are NOT smug and self-important. Most of them are very good, caring people who try to help others every day. If there is no good or bad...if its all just a matter of perspective..and it is only wrong if it is wrong for the person committing the act...then why don't we just abolish all laws and make it anything goes as long as it isn't wrong for you. I think they call that ANARCHY! |
Twiggyish | Thursday, September 19, 2002 - 05:54 am     YES Hillbilly and Magik! Exactly my thoughts. Thanks both of you.
|
Nimtu | Thursday, September 19, 2002 - 06:34 am     Hillbilly, Magik and Twig - Can't agree with you more. "I see where he uses logic and psychological truths about us as humans to explain his postion on good and evil, but I don't see the same generalizations as you do. " Faery, please explain to me the psychological truths that are being explained in Gentoo's post. I do not see them. What I do see is Gentoo expressing his beliefs and that's his right, however, it crosses the line when name calling begins. And here's a generalization that is not directed at any particular religious or ideological group - but rather at all of us: "Social norms are followed because we want to look good to others and feel important, or at least accepted." Is there anyone out there that actually differs with this besides me? It reminds me of the psychological test that asks if one withholds from stealing because they know it to be wrong - or because they are afraid they'll get caught. That statement presupposes that we are all afraid of getting caught - that there is no internal desire to be a kind and caring individual. |
Faerygdds | Thursday, September 19, 2002 - 06:39 am     OK... I see your points, but I don't classify all Christians as Bible thumpers either... You can logistically you can call a pagan a tree worshiper becuase Paganism is primarily an Earth based spirituality... However... I do not consider ALL Christians Bible thumpers... HECK I don't consider MOST Christians bible thumpers!!! I personally consider a "Bible thumper" to be a devout Christian who spends his free time trying to convert people who don't want to be converted... so frankly... I don't see the generalization... Now.. on the sheep part... I stated it last week.. and I'll state it again... in this world there are leaders, free thinkers, and sheep (blind followers)... Not there is anything wrong with that... the world needs a healthy supply of all three... Oh... and Magik... not sure why you went after me when I was simple trying to explain Gentoo's position as *I* understood his posting, but hey... happy to be the target... you stated... <<And anyone who's "Religion" included the slaughter of 3,000 innocent lives,I can't see how anyone could respect that "belief system". Guess I'm not so open-minded because I'd never defend nor respect that belief. >> I don't have to like it, but I can be empathetic. (I can't help it.. I'm a friggin EMPATH... so sue me!) If I put myself in their place growing up the way they were taught... I can understand why they dreove a plane into 2 buildings, thus killing 3000 people and assuring their place in heaven. When I step BACK into my shoes.. I find it totally horrifying as I feel the loss of any human life is tragic, but I can UNDERSTAND it from their viewpoint. So, I guess in a way, you are right... you aren't so open minded on this... but you know what??? THAT'S OK! MOST people don't have the capacity to see things from the 180 degree opposing view. I get it!!! it's a gift I have, but not everyone has it! I'm quite sure YOU are gifted in areas that I can't even begin to fathom... K? Hill... (love you babe)... <<"As smug and self-important as proclaimed morality make make us feel, that is its only truth. It helps us function in society, keeps social control and harmony strong, and for the most part makes us stronger. " This statement is also what I would call a VERY broad generalization. It would seem to imply that anyone who believes in morality is smug and self-important.>> Like I said.. I wouldn't have PUT it that way, but psychologically... the theory is sound... I don't like the adjectives they used, but they didn't use them (I don't think) to attack, but to express that it's our own morality which blinds us. Even the word religion, when broken down to it's latin base means FEAR... religion and morality have been used over the ages by many rulers and clerics as a means of controlling the masses through social norms. (eg. Think Scarlet Letter) I keep saying that the one point that divides us as a species is language... that is why I try to look beyond the words and into the intention and meaning of a statement... I still don't think Gentoo was trying to offend, but offer an explanation as to why, if you believe in blind faith, then you have to belive that the WTC was a "good" act (to those that did it). OK... well... I have to go to the doc and get test results and then I'm off to my parents to spend the day and watch Survivor premieres and BB... so play nice everyone and try to be nice to each other today... I'll try to check back in! |
Faerygdds | Thursday, September 19, 2002 - 06:53 am     Nimtu- I see where he uses logic and psychological truths about us as humans to explain his postion on good and evil, but I don't see the same generalizations as you do. " Faery, please explain to me the psychological truths that are being explained in Gentoo's post. I do not see them. What I do see is Gentoo expressing his beliefs and that's his right, however, it crosses the line when name calling begins. And here's a generalization that is not directed at any particular religious or ideological group - but rather at all of us What Gentoo was trying to say is that it is our morality which ties our hands and makes us take certain stances... This is a psychological truth. We are ALL guilty of it! Even I am guilty of it! But I TRY (I don't always succeed, but I ty) to always see the other sides point of view. "Social norms are followed because we want to look good to others and feel important, or at least accepted." Is there anyone out there that actually differs with this besides me? It reminds me of the psychological test that asks if one withholds from stealing because they know it to be wrong - or because they are afraid they'll get caught. That statement presupposes that we are all afraid of getting caught - that there is no internal desire to be a kind and caring individual. I agree with you on the psyche portion of this post... it's a no win answer wich does make assumptions... That being said....... Social norms DO exist for us to feel important ot at least accepted.... even if the acceptance you are seeking is that of your faith or God. Social norms are brought on by the majority morality. 300 years ago... it was the social norm to burn witches at the stake in proclamation that they were "evil"... that is a moral decision that was supported by the majority of the time. Ppl DURING that time didn't want to be associated with that kind of behavior in any way shape or form. Does that necessarily make a social norm right??? NO, but it doesn't automatically make it wrong either... it's still all a matter of perspective. Like I said and will keep saying... I would not have said things the way Gentoo did... I'm WAY to PC for that, but I can see where he was coming from... I'm just sorry that perhaps it was put so poorly that it was missed by most as they took it as a personal attack. I feel like Rodney King.. "Can't we all just get along?" Anyway... I have to cut this short, so I don't think I've expressed myself well at all, but my Dad is around the corner to pick me up as I only have 1 car right now and he is carting me off to the doc, so I have to go, but I will try to check in later... Love you guys! FaeryGdds |
Nimtu | Thursday, September 19, 2002 - 07:33 am     Faery- Since you’ll be checking back (and hope you are o.k. ). First off let me say, for myself, I do consider this a discussion format and not a fight…I disagree with Gentoo’s post, however, it does not upset me. I understand perfectly where you are coming from – I too am blessed with the curse of empathy (drives my husband and friends crazy – I can actually debate with them on viewpoints that I agree with!). That being said, there are a few things I have learned over the years: 1. Although I can look at a situation from somebody else’s perspective, eventually I have to make a stand based on my own beliefs. Know this wording may be a sore point for some, however, can’t help but think of the quote about evil only flourishes when good men stand by silently and do nothing. 2. I agree with you that there are leaders, followers and sheep, however, where I have a problem is when the assumption is made that because someone agrees with perhaps the majority, the current political administration, another poster, etc.. that they are one of the sheep. Now, let me state that I do have some understanding of the power of social norms (my undergrad degree is in sociology) and I do have a few clues about psychology (I am a clinical social worker), however, I have spent the majority of the last 20 years working with dying people and trust me when I tell you that most people don’t end their lives worrying about what other people thought – they look over their lives and determine their own satisfaction based on their own beliefs – most of that comes with age and life experiences (think about how teenagers are more concerned with what their peers think than your typical 30 year old…well it keeps improving as we get older). Sorry for the length (Faery – you need to tell me how you change the color of the print – too cool ) |
|