One of the things I absolutely have never been able to do is disassociate my passions from argument.
Can you? If so let me put out a very passionate topic here and have you respond to it in a dispassionate way.
Proposed: That terrorists are no more created than socialists are created.
Can you argue without passion that terrorists are somehow "made" by other than the means that ALL of us are made? This goes to the very nature of being "an elitist" I think. What gives us the authority to turn a raving, religious nut into something we managed to "create" any more than we would grant that same person the right to say that he "created or caused" us? And conversely, as the terrorist may claim... the right to kill us or force us to comply with his rather stunted world view?
Originally posted by StarValleyWyI can. I'm not sure if you make a distinction between passions and convictions, though.
One of the things I absolutely have never been able to do is disassociate my passions from argument.
Can you? If so let me put out a very passionate topic here and have you respond to it in a dispassionate way.
Proposed: That terrorists are no more created than socialists are created.
Can you argue without passion that terrorists are somehow "m ...[text shortened]... claim... the right to kill us or force us to comply with his rather stunted world view?
You often defend the US' right to kill those whom you call terrorists and force them to comply with your world view. There is no objective definition of terrorism that we would agree apply in all cases, as history is full of people who took civilian lives in order to foster their ideals for society.
3 edits
Originally posted by PalynkaI can. I'm not sure if you make a distinction between passions and convictions, though.
.
Dispassionate discourse might be more about citing examples and precedent, then supporting EACH example and precedent with impeccable logic I think. But you are right, it is very difficult to argue that way once we have adopted a point of view. And you and I are identical in that way. Once we have been "convinced" either trough passion or reason or logic... it is just about impossible to change our minds.
You often defend the US' right to kill those whom you call terrorists and force them to comply with your world view. There is no objective definition of terrorism that we would agree apply in all cases, as history is full of people who took civilian lives in order to foster their ideals for society
Said with dispassion, you might say then that the US has not bothered to define to your satisfaction what constitutes a terrorist. You would then presumably put out your definition of a terrorist. You would then cite examples of the US killing civilians as a result of its lack of definition or other cause. The pit fall in this argument is that it becomes your duty to prove that people killed by the US are not terrorists.
That said then, do you feel comfortable in trying to say WHY we have the ability or right to say that we are "creating" terrorists? And remember... "Create" implies taking a normal rational being and turing them into one willing to die for Allah. Or you must prove that "dying for Allah" isn't what they do or what they are. (edit) For example one could try to show that there are ECONOMIC or SOCIAL injustice issues or NATIONALISTIC reasons for them blowing themselves up. These are all currently being used by apologists for terror to try and divorce terrorists from their TRUE nature and motivations.
And what are these "true" motivations? Again, this is going back to the point of being an elitist. Whatever they SAY motivates them is what does motivate them. They all have done it for Allah to my knowledge.
Originally posted by StarValleyWyAnd are they going to be suprised when they find out there aren't actually 70 virgins waiting for them🙂
[b]I can. I'm not sure if you make a distinction between passions and convictions, though.
Dispassionate discourse might be more about citing examples and precedent, then supporting EACH example and precedent with impeccable logic I think. But you are right, it is very difficult to argue that way once we have adopted a point of view. And you and ...[text shortened]... s them is what does motivate them. They all have done it for Allah to my knowledge.[/b]