Heavy terr act in Madrid

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris



Nice quirp, bit invalid. The 'love for wisdom' became a real discipline when it was understood that rational thinking is the closest thing to wisdom we can get.

No. Rational thinking is a good thing, a very good thing, but its NOT the same as wisdom. Wisdom involves an insight into the human heart, the working of the world, that leads to an understanding of the role of analysis in human life, among other things. You can get rational analysis by applying a high IQ mind to texts, and by applying rational techniques of analysis. You get wisdom by living, by suffering, by loving, by interacting with human beings, by gaining insight into others and into yourself.

I too took analytic philosophy course when i was young man (though not enough for a major, Im afraid) Im no smarter now, nor more analytic, but I am most definitely wiser.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by Kucinich
your "scale" is moronic. You can't compare moral responsibility with some other form of responsibility. The terrorists have COMPLETE moral responsibility and the victims have NONE.

Have you read all my posts? Causal responsibility can indeed stay amoral (read my deathtrap example), but it can be idiotic.

As for the victims having no responsibility, I suppose there is no morality involved in democratic choices?

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


No. Rational thinking is a good thing, a very good thing, but its NOT the same as wisdom. Wisdom involves an insight into the human heart, the working of the world, that leads to an understanding of the role of analysis in human life, among other things. You can get rational analysis by applying a high IQ mind to texts, and by applying rational techniques of analysis. You get wisdom by living, by suffering, by loving, by interacting with human beings, by gaining insight into others and into yourself.

I too took analytic philosophy course when i was young man (though not enough for a major, Im afraid) Im no smarter now, nor more analytic, but I am most definitely wiser.

Well, that's the point: wisdom and love of wisdom are different disciplines: sophia and philosophia.

[OliverFA]

Originally posted by Big Crunch
Whilst I agree that the comment is wrong, and the defence of it lame I would point out that a girl walking in sexy clothing through a dodgy part of town at 1am in the morning is, by her actions, increasing her risk of being raped. That does not translate to blame or responsibilty, but it does at least translate to stupidity or ignorance.

Democracy is about making possible that the girl can walk in sexy clothing at 1 am. Maybe she is dressed in ugly clothes. Maybe she does not have any taste about how to dress properly, but she is not hurting or damaging anyone, so she must be free to do it.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


No. Rational thinking is a good thing, a very good thing, but its NOT the same as wisdom. Wisdom involves an insight into the human heart, the working of the world, that leads to an understanding of the role of analysis in human life, among other things. You can get rational analysis by applying a high IQ mind to texts, and by applying rational techniques of analysis. You get wisdom by living, by suffering, by loving, by interacting with human beings, by gaining insight into others and into yourself.

I too took analytic philosophy course when i was young man (though not enough for a major, Im afraid) Im no smarter now, nor more analytic, but I am most definitely wiser.

rational analysis - they had it coming to them - doesnt equal They deserved it - grammatical analysis provided.

wisdom
1. Most people when they use the words they had it coming, mean moral responsibility, whether thats grammatically justified or not.
2. If i want to discuss the causes of terrorism, apart from the moral meaning, i would be well to avoid a hot button phrase like "they had it coming"
3. Insisting on the phrase despite its tendency to provoke, when perfectly good alternatives exist, is either a sign of A.severe Obssesiveness B. A deliberate attempt to provoke emotional reaction (in internet terms, a troll - singularly inappropriate at this time) C. Lack of wisdom

[Fake Boris]

Well, you're somewhat right.

Still, wouldn't the wisdom of others who read my post give them the idea of discussing on the basis of good faith, since I did take the time to explain in large what I meant by 'had it coming'?

Besides, sorry, but I tried to think of an efficient alternative, but couldn't find one.

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by OliverFA


Democracy is about making possible that the girl can walk in sexy clothing at 1 am. Maybe she is dressed in ugly clothes. Maybe she does not have any taste about how to dress properly, but she is not hurting or damaging anyone, so she must be free to do it.

, sig material.

No one said it wasn't a right or anything, we are talking about individual will here. Your post does not even remotely make a point.

Why wouldn't a dictator allow little girls to dress in sexy clothing anyway?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
Well, you're somewhat right.

Still, wouldn't the wisdom of others who read my post give them the idea of discussing on the basis of good faith, since I did take the time to explain in large what I meant by 'had it coming'?

Besides, sorry, but I tried to think of an efficient alternative, but couldn't find one.

yes, someone who was wise would not explode at you (at least not simply for that turn of phrase) They would rather attempt to look at your posts, see the larger picture of who you are, perhaps by relating it to other people theyve experienced, or even (as I did) to themselves, and see not a terrorist apologist (at least not based on that turn of phrase) but a not atypical immature college philosophy student.

Of course its quite possible that the individual who exploded at you has never been such a phil student himself (BTW i should point out that this applies to a number of analytic disciplines, not just phil by any means) and has limited experience of such. Though i suppose one could say that such inexperience is itself a lack of wisdom.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
Well, you're somewhat right.

Still, wouldn't the wisdom of others who read my post give them the idea of discussing on the basis of good faith, since I did take the time to explain in large what I meant by 'had it coming'?

Besides, sorry, but I tried to think of an efficient alternative, but couldn't find one.

In this case an inefficient alternative would have been preferable to a toxic phrase.

[The Mad Viking]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


it doesnt quite fit either MO and it fits both.

I'm sorry, but for me it is a MUCH smaller leap from a single remotely detonated car TNT-bomb killing 21 to a dozen remotely detonated train TNT-bombs killing 200, than from blowing up a building or a warship in a muslim area, to flying a bunch of commercial aircraft into buildings in the USA. MUCH smaller.

Non-suicidal doesnt prove its not AQ, any more the fact that it was mass attack rather than an assasination proves that it wasnt ETA.

Agreed.

How about the long history of ETA terror attacks in Spain vs ZERO by A-Q?

Doesn't that form part of an MO?

How about the recently prevented train bombing attempts by ETA?

Doesn't that form part of an MO?

In fact, the ONLY thing outside of the ETA MO is the size of the attack.

Almost EVERYTHING is outside the MO of A-Q.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
yes, someone who was wise would not explode at you (at least not simply for that turn of phrase) They would rather attempt to look at your posts, see the larger picture of who you are, perhaps by relating it to other people theyve experienced, or even (as I did) to themselves, and see not a terrorist apologist (at least not based on that turn of phrase) but a not atypical immature college philosophy student.

I just thought it was a particularly good troll considering his spiel in the moment of silence thread.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by The Mad Viking


I'm sorry, but for me it is a MUCH smaller leap from a single remotely detonated car TNT-bomb killing 21 to a dozen remotely detonated train TNT-bombs killing 200, than from blowing up a building or a warship in a muslim area, to flying a bunch of commercial aircraft into buildings in the USA. MUCH smaller.

except they had planned a multiple hijacking earlier, in southeast asia, but the plot was foiled.

and the attacks in the muslim world were largely on US targets (2 embassies and a warship)

and the 1993 attack on the WTC was accomplished by Islamists, with linkages to the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, which subsequently "merged" into AQ.

[Fake Boris]

I really meant my comment in the silence thread. I say mourning is fine, but the mourning extremists have taken it too far, literally ostracizing anyone who doesn't want to feel bad everytime a newspaper tells you to.

I experienced this on 9/11.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by The Mad Viking


I'm sorry, but for me it is a MUCH smaller leap from a single remotely detonated car TNT-bomb killing 21 to a dozen remotely detonated train TNT-bombs killing 200, than from blowing up a building or a warship in a muslim area, to flying a bunch of commercial aircraft into buildings in the USA. MUCH smaller.

Non-suicidal doesnt prove its not AQ, any more the fact that it was mass attack rather than an assasination proves that it wasnt ETA.

Agreed.

How about the long history of ETA terror attacks in Spain vs ZERO by A-Q?

Doesn't that form part of an MO?

How about the recently prevented train bombing attempts by ETA?

Doesn't that form part of an MO?

In fact, the ONLY thing outside of the ETA MO is the size of the attack.

Almost EVERYTHING is outside the MO of A-Q.

AQ has regulary attacked "new countries" - and it has apparently made attempts in France and in UK - and it has had active cells in Spain - so the attack being in Spain would not be outside its MO. (" Tony killed Mr Jones, he killed Mr Brown but the murder victim this time was Mr Smith - definitely NOT Tonys MO")

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
I really meant my comment in the silence thread. I say mourning is fine, but the mourning extremists have taken it too far, literally ostracizing anyone who doesn't want to feel bad everytime a newspaper tells you to.

I experienced this on 9/11.

I dont think the newspapers started the moment of silence thread. A poly poster did. If you didnt feel bad, you were free to ignore the thread. I frequently ignore threads where my response could only serve to provoke
(except when it comes to teasing Paiktis about some aspect of Greek politics or history - but I know he wont get bent out of shape over it)