Sex and the Religious-Left
- Alexis Jacobi
- Posts: 8301
- Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am
Re: Sex and the Religious-Left
Hot, hyper-liberal rhetoric always operates by predictable patterns. They repeat endlessly.
It is vain and empty however.
It is vain and empty however.
-
Gary Childress
- Posts: 11755
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
- Location: It's my fault
Re: Sex and the Religious-Left
Agreed. Give us something worthwhile to discuss AJ. You're trope about "metaphysics" has gotten absurd.
Re: Sex and the Religious-Left
Both the US and the UK should be occupied by some hostile nation for a few decades, that would set them straight heh.
Re: Sex and the Religious-Left
Philosophically minded grown ups know that such terms as "good and evil" are opinons. Opinions are subjective as they are point of view.Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 7:11 pm The topic of who, and what, is evil is one that can only be broached in a spirit of fairness and balance.
Unless of course one is deeply involved and committed to underhanded rhetorics.
You entire argument (quote/unquote) is now established in this form: Either you declare that •Hitler is Evil• …
… or I will assert this indicates you are associated with that Ontological Malevolence, are a supporter of Hitler, and are as evil.
Grownups don’t play in these semiotic pits.
A false comparison. Convenient, but false.Likewise, I can say that your dishonesty matches that of Immanuel Can, and that this makes you a weak and sad little shit stain of a man.
You will proceed down an established line at this point.
Even someone as obvious as Hitler attracted adoration and was thought of as good for something.
I'm pretty sure, given a different time and place of birth there are more than a few characters on this Forum who would have adored Hitler
- FlashDangerpants
- Posts: 8819
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm
Re: Sex and the Religious-Left
There's edge cases, and then there's paradigms.Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 7:11 pm The topic of who, and what, is evil is one that can only be broached in a spirit of fairness and balance.
Maybe it's difficult to say that my cat is a large cat, you may draw a different line to me on that matter. It is not difficult to say that a lion is a large cat, they are a paradigm example of exactly that thing. They are what the term was coined to mean. Even if tigers are bigger.
Let's try another one. Perhaps you find it difficult to say with appropriate fairness and balance that John Williams is or was a good musical composer, some people like his work on Star Wars a lot, others not so much. But it seems likely that you would assent that Mozart was a great composer, because that's a paradigm example. If we have use for the notion of a great composer at all, then Mozart gets that nod, but arguably John Williams does not, that latter one may be a matter of opinion.
So what would we consider a pardigm of an evil man, if not Hitler? On that basis, you should have no difficulty identifying Hitler as evil. Not unless either you are the one discarding notions of good and evil even though the moral skeptic is me, so that would be strange. Or ... I don't know ... perhaps you share some sympathy with Hitler in some sort of way?
-
Gary Childress
- Posts: 11755
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
- Location: It's my fault
- Alexis Jacobi
- Posts: 8301
- Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2021 3:00 am
Re: Sex and the Religious-Left
In that period, as in all periods, bad and evil actions and decisions were evident in people (leaders, drivers), and in movements. Hitler, in the present usage, is meant as a symbol of ontological evil. Notice this, internalize it, process it, and you will arrive at a more mature perspective about your usage.
-
Gary Childress
- Posts: 11755
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
- Location: It's my fault
Re: Sex and the Religious-Left
Well he basically brought the world into a situation that created ENORMOUS death and suffering. He invaded Poland, France, Russia, Norway, EVERYONE around him almost with the exception of those who collaborated with him. He did not care about the suffering he brought on others. Germany itself, his own "blood and soil" eventually paid dearly for Hitlers prejudices. If there is such thing as "evil" are those not traits or otherwise indicative of an evil person?Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 7:45 pm In that period, as in all periods, bad and evil actions and decisions were evident in people (leaders, drivers), and in movements. Hitler, in the present usage, is meant as a symbol of ontological evil. Notice this, internalize it, process it, and you will arrive at a more mature perspective about your usage.
-
Gary Childress
- Posts: 11755
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
- Location: It's my fault
Re: Sex and the Religious-Left
AND On top of that, I suspect Hitler might have been "weak" and a "faggot". (Maybe putting it that way can extract some dislike of him from you?)
Last edited by Gary Childress on Sat Mar 09, 2024 8:11 pm, edited 3 times in total.
- FlashDangerpants
- Posts: 8819
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:54 pm
Re: Sex and the Religious-Left
Nobody believes in ontological evil. Hitler was this very bad man who did exceptionally evil stuff. And you are this weird man who needs to avoid saying that but also wants nobody to notice.Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 7:45 pm Hitler, in the present usage, is meant as a symbol of ontological evil.
Re: Sex and the Religious-Left
But he was loved.FlashDangerpants wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 8:03 pmNobody believes in ontological evil. Hitler was this very bad man who did exceptionally evil stuff. And you are this weird man who needs to avoid saying that but also wants nobody to notice.Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 7:45 pm Hitler, in the present usage, is meant as a symbol of ontological evil.
He loved his dog; refused to eat meat.
He built the autobahns. Ahnd many people hate Jews. They think he did the right thing.
Now how many people think Obama, Bush and Clinton are "evil"?? I can tell you that many people who live in islam and have suffered from US agression think this trio are evil. Are they right?
Re: Sex and the Religious-Left
Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 8:02 pm AND On top of that, I suspect Hitler might have been "weak" and a "faggot". (Maybe putting it that way can extract some dislike of him from you?)
Hitler only had one ball.
Hitler has only got one ball,
Göring has two but very small,
Himmler is rather sim'lar,
But poor old Goebbels has no balls at all.
-
Gary Childress
- Posts: 11755
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 3:08 pm
- Location: It's my fault
Re: Sex and the Religious-Left
Anyway, my point is that AJ seems to have more problems with human foibles than with human fascists.Sculptor wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 8:22 pmGary Childress wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 8:02 pm AND On top of that, I suspect Hitler might have been "weak" and a "faggot". (Maybe putting it that way can extract some dislike of him from you?)
Hitler only had one ball.
Hitler has only got one ball,
Göring has two but very small,
Himmler is rather sim'lar,
But poor old Goebbels has no balls at all.
However, perhaps I am being unfair. Perhaps I'm only upset because I'm not a model citizen as AJ would have me.