I'm straight and tired of gay pride

[Alexis Jacobi]

This is why you "Hate" the Madonna and Our Lord, Jesus Christ, King of Kings.

This is why Hairball sees "nothing wrong" with a freak, dressed up as a woman, spreading Pedophile propaganda to school age children.

Just for the record; I not only see nothing wrong with men in fancy dress reading to kids, I also hate the Madonna and your poxy Lord, King of Kings and Lord of the Rings. You horrible little man.

That told him.

In my own view, though it will prove impossible to bring out here, the wiser choice, the most productive choice -- if understanding is our objective -- would be to linger over and discuss Harbal's seemingly deeply felt opposition to the figure of the Madonna and also the figure of Christ as King. And also to examine the other side of the equation and the value-principles there.

In order to understand these things, and instead of stubborn opposition, one has to be willing to *enter into* the way that those who value these images and to try to understand the sense that stands behind them.

But if there is a refusal to do this -- and having read Harbal for many months I understand his opposition -- then his perspective can only get locked down into one of those boring perspectives of the Culture Wars.

In my view it occurs at such a low level. It resolves into bickering and base argument. It will get us nowhere.

[Wizard22]

In my own view, though it will prove impossible to bring out here, the wiser choice, the most productive choice -- if understanding is our objective -- would be to linger over and discuss Harbal's seemingly deeply felt opposition to the figure of the Madonna and also the figure of Christ as King. And also to examine the other side of the equation and the value-principles there.

In order to understand these things, and instead of stubborn opposition, one has to be willing to *enter into* the way that those who value these images and to try to understand the sense that stands behind them.

But if there is a refusal to do this -- and having read Harbal for many months I understand his opposition -- then his perspective can only get locked down into one of those boring perspectives of the Culture Wars.

In my view it occurs at such a low level. It resolves into bickering and base argument. It will get us nowhere.

So what is to be done with those who will not listen to Reason?

I think Reason only appeals to a very small group of people, explicitly, those who can "change their minds" or are at least, willing to.

There's a rare type of Innocence associated with Reasonability. You have to have the potential to Change, a type of malleability.

[Harbal]

This is why you "Hate" the Madonna and Our Lord, Jesus Christ, King of Kings.

This is why Hairball sees "nothing wrong" with a freak, dressed up as a woman, spreading Pedophile propaganda to school age children.

Just for the record; I not only see nothing wrong with men in fancy dress reading to kids, I also hate the Madonna and your poxy Lord, King of Kings and Lord of the Rings. You horrible little man.

That told him.

In my own view, though it will prove impossible to bring out here, the wiser choice, the most productive choice -- if understanding is our objective -- would be to linger over and discuss Harbal's seemingly deeply felt opposition to the figure of the Madonna and also the figure of Christ as King.

Yes, please analyse my deeply felt opposition to the figure of the Madonna and also the figure of Christ as King. You can even consult me on anything you're not sure about.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Yes, please analyse my deeply felt opposition to the figure of the Madonna and also the figure of Christ as King. You can even consult me on anything you're not sure about.

That is pretty much what I do and what interests me: the formation of our ideas, values, and of course our relationship to the traditions and the very ground of our own civilization and culture. We are *exponents* of modern positions, and these can be examined and thought about. The value in doing so? To understand how we arrived at what we *are*. And also as a way to examine how we can change or modify our views and in that sense *who we are*.

I cannot consult you, Harbal -- we established this loooooonnnnggg ago -- because you do not know yourself (in the senses I refer to).

[Harbal]

Yes, please analyse my deeply felt opposition to the figure of the Madonna and also the figure of Christ as King. You can even consult me on anything you're not sure about.

That is pretty much what I do and what interests me: the formation of our ideas, values, and of course our relationship to the traditions and the very ground of our own civilization and culture. We are *exponents* of modern positions, and these can be examined and thought about. The value in doing so? To understand how we arrived at what we *are*. And also as a way to examine how we can change or modify our views and in that sense *who we are*.

I cannot consult you, Harbal -- we established this loooooonnnnggg ago -- because you do not know yourself (in the senses I refer to).

Okay, Alexis, go it alone.

[FlashDangerpants]

Yes, please analyse my deeply felt opposition to the figure of the Madonna and also the figure of Christ as King. You can even consult me on anything you're not sure about.

That is pretty much what I do and what interests me: the formation of our ideas, values, and of course our relationship to the traditions and the very ground of our own civilization and culture. We are *exponents* of modern positions, and these can be examined and thought about. The value in doing so? To understand how we arrived at what we *are*. And also as a way to examine how we can change or modify our views and in that sense *who we are*.

I cannot consult you, Harbal -- we established this loooooonnnnggg ago -- because you do not know yourself (in the senses I refer to).

I'm going to help you out here by speaking very plainly so that you don't get confused about subtext. This is a philosophy forum Jacobi, and you are no philosopher. You are not equipped to take on Harbal on the matter of normative truth, and neither is wizzy. Immanuel Can is better at that question than you two, and Harbal regularly shreds him without even breaking out the philosophy lingo to do it.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Okay, Alexis, go it alone.

It was Samuel Beckett who wrote:

I can’t go on / I’ll go on

The slog is very much like that: through the miasma and goop of a postmodern swamp.

[Alexis Jacobi]

I'm going to help you out here by speaking very plainly so that you don't get confused about subtext. This is a philosophy forum Jacobi, and you are no philosopher. You are not equipped to take on Harbal on the matter of normative truth, and neither is wizzy. Immanuel Can is better at that question than you two, and Harbal regularly shreds him without even breaking out the philosophy lingo to do it.

Duly noted.

Would you kindly share your deepest thoughts, or even not so deep thoughts, on that topic of normative truth? You seem really in the know.

C’mon you perv, give it a shot.

Harbal, you’ve got a significant ally! A real intellectual powerhouse. Does the bulldog bite hard?

Things are really going to heat up around here when Flash gets going.

[Sculptor]

You obviously believe in the category of *evil*. (Or did you use the term casually?)

If that is so, would you agree that "Evil cannot create anything new, but can only corrupt and ruin what the force of good has created"?

I would say that in respect to Tolkienn's views that the statement in quotes above corresponds to his ideas. In that sense it is *sound*.

No. Evil does not exist anymore than good.

Evil exists and you are proof of it, Sculpty.
The Left is Evil.
The Right is Good.

JRR Tolkein knew full well the distinction between the two.

If I'm evil then so was Tolkein, Vehemently anti-racist, and anti-nazi. And would be considered to be EVIL by your measures.
He fought in WWI against your sort of evil right wing garbage.

[Sculptor]

I'm pretty sure Alex Jaboci is an invader from "I love Philosophy" Forum.
A place devoid of any recognisable philosophy.

[Alexis Jacobi]

If I'm evil then so was Tolkein, Vehemently anti-racist, and anti-Nazi

Just FYI:

From a Wiki article, make of it what you will:

J. R. R. Tolkien's Middle-earth fantasy writings have often been accused of embodying outmoded attitudes to race. However, scholars have noted that he was influenced by Victorian attitudes to race and to a literary tradition of monsters, and that he was anti-racist both in peacetime and during the two World Wars.

With the late 19th century background of eugenics and a fear of moral decline, some critics believed that the mention of race mixing in The Lord of the Rings embodied scientific racism. Other commentators thought that Tolkien's description of the orcs was modeled on racist wartime propaganda caricatures of the Japanese. Critics have noted, too, that the work embodies a moral geography, with good in the West, evil in the East.

Against this, Tolkien strongly opposed Nazi racial theories, as seen in a 1938 letter he wrote to his publisher, while in the Second World War he vigorously opposed anti-German propaganda. His Middle-earth has been described as definitely polycultural and polylingual, while scholars have noted that attacks on Tolkien based on The Lord of the Rings often omit relevant evidence from the text.

[Sculptor]

If I'm evil then so was Tolkein, Vehemently anti-racist, and anti-Nazi

Just FYI:

From a Wiki article, make of it what you will:

J. R. R. Tolkien's Middle-earth fantasy writings have often been accused of embodying outmoded attitudes to race. However, scholars have noted that he was influenced by Victorian attitudes to race and to a literary tradition of monsters, and that he was anti-racist both in peacetime and during the two World Wars.

With the late 19th century background of eugenics and a fear of moral decline, some critics believed that the mention of race mixing in The Lord of the Rings embodied scientific racism. Other commentators thought that Tolkien's description of the orcs was modeled on racist wartime propaganda caricatures of the Japanese. Critics have noted, too, that the work embodies a moral geography, with good in the West, evil in the East.

Against this, Tolkien strongly opposed Nazi racial theories, as seen in a 1938 letter he wrote to his publisher, while in the Second World War he vigorously opposed anti-German propaganda. His Middle-earth has been described as definitely polycultural and polylingual, while scholars have noted that attacks on Tolkien based on The Lord of the Rings often omit relevant evidence from the text.

What's your point?

[Alexis Jacobi]

I'm pretty sure Alex Jacobi is an invader from "I love Philosophy" Forum. A place devoid of any recognizable philosophy.

No, I don’t know the place.

What recognizable philosophy interests you and how would you relate that interest and topic to the present *discussion*?

[Harbal]

Harbal, you’ve got a significant ally!

I would like to think so, and yes, very significant.



And you have Wizard trying to suck up to you. Still, life's not always fair.

[Wizard22]

If I'm evil then so was Tolkein, Vehemently anti-racist, and anti-nazi. And would be considered to be EVIL by your measures.
He fought in WWI against your sort of evil right wing garbage.

More Lies from the Deceivers

Sauron, by the way, wanted to "integrate" the orcish hordes into human societies. JRR Tolkein is Pro-Racist because he represented the Good Races versus the Evil ones.

You clearly didn't understand the books.

But that's normal for double-digit IQs.



You, Flash, Hairball, need to stick with coloring-books. And stay far away from Philosophy.