Philosophy Now Forum

From NYT opinion piece...

"At the Munich Security Forum this month, he stated that Kyiv had made a mistake abandoning the nuclear weapons it inherited from the Soviet Union. The United States’ unwillingness to defend a friendly country like Ukraine can make at least some American allies believe that nuclear weapons are the only way to guarantee their sovereignty. "

Hmm...

Had Ukraine not given up those nukes?

Then we'd also be probing the mind of the "comedian turned president" here.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:18 pm if you were Joe Biden, what would you do to drive the Russians out?

rephrased: what ought Joe do?

not a goddamned thing

What is the most rational and virtuous, uh, philosophical response?

What Ukrainians are doin' right now.

It is not within the realms of possibility for any American president to "drive Putin out".
It just aint an option. Putin has called our nuclear bluff and is acting how he sees fit with some justification I should add.
The best rational response is for Ukraine not to have two masters.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:50 pm From NYT opinion piece...

"At the Munich Security Forum this month, he stated that Kyiv had made a mistake abandoning the nuclear weapons it inherited from the Soviet Union. The United States’ unwillingness to defend a friendly country like Ukraine can make at least some American allies believe that nuclear weapons are the only way to guarantee their sovereignty. "

Hmm...

Had Ukraine not given up those nukes?

Then we'd also be probing the mind of the "comedian turned president" here.

This is bogus.
When the Ukraine parted company from the Soviet, those nukes were still part of the Russian Federal military aparatus, and "giving them up" was matched by US de-comissioning.

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:53 pm

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:50 pm From NYT opinion piece...

"At the Munich Security Forum this month, he stated that Kyiv had made a mistake abandoning the nuclear weapons it inherited from the Soviet Union. The United States’ unwillingness to defend a friendly country like Ukraine can make at least some American allies believe that nuclear weapons are the only way to guarantee their sovereignty. "

Hmm...

Had Ukraine not given up those nukes?

Then we'd also be probing the mind of the "comedian turned president" here.

This is bogus.
When the Ukraine parted company from the Soviet, those nukes were still part of the Russian Federal military aparatus, and "giving them up" was matched by US de-comissioning.

Well, here's one take on it...

https://www.npr.org/2022/02/21/10821245 ... n-invasion

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:17 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 6:45 pm dasein...how Putin's past predisposed him to think this instead of that

Yes, we know...there's nuthin' more to Putin, or you, or me, or him, or her than a program.

Roombas: all.

Actually, my point is more in the way of suggesting that what's true of Putin is true of you and I too.

Russia invades Ukraine. Now, as philosophers or ethicists or political scientists, is there a way for us using the technical tools at our disposal -- logic, epistemology -- to determine either 1] the optimal frame of mind in reacting to it or 2] the only possible rational assessment period.

Just BECOME, and REMAIN (determined to be), Truly OPEN and Honest - ALWAYS.

What else is there to 'determine'?

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:17 pm Is that how we ourselves go about determining our own point of view?

But because of what and who 'you' ARE, EXACTLY, 'you' do NOT 'determine' "your own point of view". 'you' ONLY 'see' 'things' the "way they are" BECAUSE OF the past experiences that 'that body' has had, hitherto, always.

Once one is able to STEP OUT of, and above, the 'you', and LOOK AT the 'you', Truly OBJECTIVELY, then that One is AT the Truly ADVANTAGEOUS VIEW-POINT, and thus HAS a Truly CRYSTAL CLEAR VIEW and POINT OF VIEW.

The 'views' within a body are, literally, who 'you' are. So, 'you' do NOT 'determine' ANY view. The views expressed, with verbal or written words, are just 'you'. And, the reason EVERY body, literally, has DIFFERENT 'views' is because EVERY body has, literally, had DIFFERENT 'experiences'.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:17 pm Or is it far more likely that the reason many of the opinions expressed here are in conflict is because we have led very different lives.

It is that SIMPLE.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:17 pm We have had very different experiences, interacted in very different relationships and came into contact with very different information, knowledge and ideas?

OF COURSE, and OBVIOUSLY.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:17 pm It's not a "program" so much as a predisposition.

It could be argued either way.

'The (individual) experiences of a body' have 'programmed' the (individual) 'views', (the 'you'), within that body (and to 'view' 'things', or be 'you', in a certain way), OR, the way 'things' are LOOKED AT or 'viewed' is a 'predisposition' of 'the experiences', and so 'you' are the way 'you' are, at any given moment.

So, depending on WHICH WAY 'things' here are LOOKED AT and SEEN, which is SOLELY because of what 'that' body has previously experienced affect the whether the words 'programmed' or 'predisposition' are used. BUT, essentially, they are BOTH POINTING TO the EXACT SAME phenomenon.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:17 pm An existential predilection derived from a life we only have so much understanding of and control over.

'you', human beings, only have so much control. 'I', on the other hand, have ALL control.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:17 pm Now, Putin strikes me as dangerous here because he is not a Lenin or a Mao or a Fidel. A full-blown Marxist out to change the world for the better. A revolutionary. Instead, he is dangerous because everything seems to revolve for him around "me, myself and I". He is a narcissist...maybe even a sociopath. A thug.

Okay. That is one view.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:17 pm You can't "reason" with him by arguing that your own "principles" should prevail.

Can 'you' 'reason' with absolutely ANY one by 'arguing' that your OWN 'principles' should prevail?

If yes, then will you provide 'that' example and SHOW us HOW?

If no, then WHY NOT?

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:17 pm And not just in Ukraine, right? But everywhere.

In other words, can't the self-righteous idealists here be equally dangerous?

It's just that now the stakes revolve around a possible nuclear exchange itself. The end of the world as we know it.

Absolutely EVERY second is; 'The end of the 'world' as we know it', AS WELL AS being; 'The start of a 'new world' as we know it'.

But, as we ALL KNOW; ' It just all depends on how one LOOKS AT and SEE 'things' '.

And, MOST of 'you', adult human beings, as just SHOWN and PROVED here REALLY only 'care' about wars like this BECAUSE 'you' COULD, unintentionally, become INVOLVED.

'you' only REALLY START TO CARE when the war turns into some 'thing' that could affect 'you' DIRECTLY.

If ANY war turns into a 'nuclear exchange', which then affects 'you', and EVERY one on earth, then the only true ones to thank for this happening are 'you'. After all it was 'you', adult human beings, who gave POWER to, and ALLOWED, those who could CAUSE such a 'thing' to happen.

Have ANY of 'you', in the days when this is being written, YET REALIZED the absolute ABSURDITY of creating 'weapons', and 'nuclear' ones at that, to protect "yourselves", against "yourselves"?

WATCHING and OBSERVING 'you', adult human beings, "AT WORK", in the days when this was being written, was about the most LAUGHABLE 'thing' in the WHOLE of Existence.

WATCHING 'children' PLAY is about the most ENJOYABLE 'thing' to OBSERVE. But WATCHING 'you', adults, is absolutely AMUSING, to WITNESS.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:17 pm So, given your own assessment of the invasion, if you were Joe Biden, what would you do to drive the Russians out?

If 'you' were the human being "joe biden", then 'you' would be doing EXACTLY what that one of 'you' IS DOING.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:17 pm What is the most rational and virtuous, uh, philosophical response?

What does the word 'philosophical' here mean, or refer to, to you, EXACTLY?

But what I would say would be to just ask the so-called "russians" what 'it' is that they want. Then LISTEN, and then, literally, take 'it' from 'there'.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 9:04 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:53 pm

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:50 pm From NYT opinion piece...

"At the Munich Security Forum this month, he stated that Kyiv had made a mistake abandoning the nuclear weapons it inherited from the Soviet Union. The United States’ unwillingness to defend a friendly country like Ukraine can make at least some American allies believe that nuclear weapons are the only way to guarantee their sovereignty. "

Hmm...

Had Ukraine not given up those nukes?

Then we'd also be probing the mind of the "comedian turned president" here.

This is bogus.
When the Ukraine parted company from the Soviet, those nukes were still part of the Russian Federal military aparatus, and "giving them up" was matched by US de-comissioning.

Well, here's one take on it...

https://www.npr.org/2022/02/21/10821245 ... n-invasion

Interesting but the real issue for the moment is this one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements
SInce the Ukrainian Azov batallion has been continually persecuting the people of these republics the current crisis was inevitable.
The nukes is a red herring.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azov_Battalion

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:39 pm How about this...

The White House insists that until Russia pulls out of Ukraine, no American corporations will be permitted to do business in Russia. See how that works.

Same for China if they invade Taiwan.

So, if "americans" decided to invade "afghanistan" or "iraq", for example, then is it all right, to you, that "russia" and/or "china" insists no "russian" and/or "chinese" corporation do absolutely ANY business AT ALL in "america"? Would you also then say, "See how that works", as well?

If no, to either, then WHY NOT?

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:39 pm http://www.aalep.eu/american-companies-operating-russia
http://jiesworld.com/international_corp ... _china.htm

Or Congress can pass a law that, until both Russia and China are truly democratic, no American corporations can do business there.

LOL
LOL
LOL

Do you REALLY think or BELIEVE that TELLING "another" what THEY MUST DO will EVER be Truly SUCCESSFUL?

If yes, then REALLY?

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:39 pm Of course, the global economy is owned and operated by those who care very, very little about "democratic principles".

WHY do ANY of 'you', adult human beings, in the days when this is being written, put just about EVERY 'thing' down to 'MONEY'?

What can be CLEARLY SEEN here, AGAIN, is that the MOST UNNECESSARY 'thing' in Life was given the MOST IMPORTANCE, back in the days when this was being written.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:39 pm Here the capitalists in America and Russia and China are, in many important ways, interchangeable. The bottom line is always the same: cheap labor, markets and natural resources.

This is because ALL of 'you', adult human beings, have become Truly GREEDY and SELFISH individuals.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:39 pm What, American foreign policy is different here?

I do NOT know, AND, I do NOT care.

WHY do some people put SIGNIFICANCE into what "americans", and/or "their" so-called "foreign policies", do?

There is probably more 'things' True, Right, AND Correct in the "sentinelese's" "foreign policy", then there EVER WAS or WILL BE in "america's" own "foreign policies".

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:39 pm It really is based solely on human rights and freedom and justice?

From my perspective what 'it' REALLY LOOKS based solely on; is GREED and SELFISHNESS.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:21 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:01 pm

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 2:13 pm

Yes. I think this is the way of the future.

But 'civil disobedience' only encourages the one/s who created the 'rules' to PUNISH more and further. That is; the more disobedience there is, then the harsher and stricter the 'penalties' become, until and and EVERY 'one' who is DISOBEDIENT ends up 'locked up' or 'dead', which then makes the 'rest' to scared to 'disobey' the 'made up rules'. As can be CLEARLY SEEN, and is PROVED True, within EVERY country, and especially in ones like in "north korea".

Also, because of 'generational child abuse' ALL of 'you', adult human beings, have a BELIEF that; "If MY RULES a 'disobeyed', then you WILL BE PUNISHED".

'you', adults, HAVE and HOLD this BELIEF and SAY this, now, because this is what 'you' ALL CONTINUALLY heard as children.

When 'you' STOP BELIEVING, "If you do NOT do as I TELL YOU, then you WILL BE PUNISHED", then those that ARE 'above you' WILL EVENTUALLY STOP having and HOLDING 'this BELIEF', ALSO.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 2:13 pm Also, the executive power of US Presidents must be curtailed to exclude the ability to declare war without the consent of the American people.

WHY 'would you' and WHY 'did you', adult human beings, give that sort of POWER to one human being in the FIRST PLACE?

And from what I have OBSERVED the ones 'you', people, give that POWER to, on just about EVERY occasion is the VERY LAST 'human being' I would give that POWER to.

But, as I say 'you' ARE completely and utterly FREE to do absolutely whatever you CHOOSE TO DO.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 2:13 pm And there needs to be a free press that will report things objectively and not just the way official sources want them to be reported.

STOP giving POWER to 'some people', and to "the press", and then "they" will STOP reporting 'things', and then 'things' WILL CHANGE.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 2:13 pm I think something like that would best be achieved through the decentralization of media ownership.

Just STOP WANTING and 'buying' completely UNNECESSARY 'things', then "the media" has NO other purpose than to just report what is ONLY and ACTUALLY IRREFUTABLY True.

Because 'you', adult human beings, will BUY 'reports' and 'reporting', as well as 'products', "the media" exists solely to OBTAIN MONEY. Just about ALL of the "current media", in the days when this is being written, exists because of, and for, 'money' through SELLING 'information' and ADVERTISING. So, that "current media" will NOT let, "The Truth get in the way of a good story".

Most of 'you', adult human beings, in the days when this is being written, Honestly, much prefer to hear a so-called "good story", than thee Truth.

But the GREATEST 'story', EVER to be TOLD, WILL BE, and IS, thee Truth. But, anyway, the "current media", in the days when this is being written, SOLELY works around the 'premise of'; 'obtaining MORE money'.

Which is also about the SOLE 'premise' of EVERY adult human being, in the days when this was being written. Thus, the continuous conflict and WARS, hitherto when this was being written.

To be honest, Age, I don't think it serves any constructive purpose to blame the rest of us for what is happening any more than it serves a constructive purpose to include yourself in that blame.

So, if 'I' nor 'you' are to BLAME for what 'is happening', then who or what is CAUSING what 'is happening'?

What would you SAY, "serves as a constructive purpose"? And, a 'constructive purpose' in relation to 'what', EXACTLY?

Are you under some sort of DELUSION that a 'constructive purpose' will be resolved or made here, in this forum?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:21 pm I doubt people not buying things we need in order to stop the press from being privately owned and manipulated by corporations is going to work.

I wonder if you have EVEN UNDERSTOOD what I ACTUALLY MEANT.

But I could NOT even be bothered asking a CLARIFYING question regarding this, this time.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:21 pm As far as giving power to others, there's no one in office right now whom I voted for in the last election.

Are you ALLOWING them to STAY THERE, now?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:21 pm So you'll have to find someone else to blame for all the world's problems, preferably someone other than yourself, I'm sure.

Here we have ANOTHER PRIME EXAMPLE of ASSUMPTIONS leading one COMPLETELY and UTTERLY ASTRAY.

I AM to BLAME for absolutely EVERY 'problem', AND ALL the 'mess', in the 'world'. As I KNOW, EXACTLY, HOW TO FULLY CLEAN UP, STOP, and PREVENT, ANY and EVERY 'problem', and 'mess' from ARISING EVER AGAIN. So, I AM TO BLAME because I am NOT actively SHOWING HOW, YET.

'I' am a USELESS and WORTHLESS 'communicator' as SHOWN and PROVED True, here in this forum, and as EVERY poster here will ACKNOWLEDGE is ABSOLUTELY True as well, I am just in the process of LEARNING how to communicate better with 'you', human beings. So, 'I' AM, literally, TO BLAME for this current 'mess' that ALL of 'you' are HAVING TO live through, in the days when this is being written.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 9:52 pm I AM to BLAME for absolutely EVERY 'problem', AND ALL the 'mess', in the 'world'. As I KNOW, EXACTLY, HOW TO FULLY CLEAN UP, STOP, and PREVENT, ANY and EVERY 'problem', and 'mess' from ARISING EVER AGAIN. So, I AM TO BLAME because I am NOT actively SHOWING HOW, YET.

'I' am a USELESS and WORTHLESS 'communicator' as SHOWN and PROVED True, here in this forum, and as EVERY poster here will ACKNOWLEDGE is ABSOLUTELY True as well, I am just in the process of LEARNING how to communicate better with 'you', human beings. So, 'I' AM, literally, TO BLAME for this current 'mess' that ALL of 'you' are HAVING TO live through, in the days when this is being written.

I'm sure you're not to blame for all that is going on in the world, Age.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 9:59 pm

Age wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 9:52 pm I AM to BLAME for absolutely EVERY 'problem', AND ALL the 'mess', in the 'world'. As I KNOW, EXACTLY, HOW TO FULLY CLEAN UP, STOP, and PREVENT, ANY and EVERY 'problem', and 'mess' from ARISING EVER AGAIN. So, I AM TO BLAME because I am NOT actively SHOWING HOW, YET.

'I' am a USELESS and WORTHLESS 'communicator' as SHOWN and PROVED True, here in this forum, and as EVERY poster here will ACKNOWLEDGE is ABSOLUTELY True as well, I am just in the process of LEARNING how to communicate better with 'you', human beings. So, 'I' AM, literally, TO BLAME for this current 'mess' that ALL of 'you' are HAVING TO live through, in the days when this is being written.

I'm sure you're not to blame for all that is going on in the world, Age.

OF COURSE the one known as "age" is NOT to blame for all that is going on in the world. To ASSUME 'that' or to ASSUME 'I' said ANY thing like 'that' is just RIDICULOUS.

But when who and what the 'I' IS, EXACTLY, is KNOWN, properly AND correctly, then 'you' WILL FULLY UNDERSTAND what 'I' SAID and WROTE here.

Germany's invasion of Poland in 1939 led to the outbreak of World War II, and by 1941 Nazi forces had occupied much of Europe.

Putin has an agenda and that includes more than Ukraine.

reasonvemotion wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 10:17 pm Germany's invasion of Poland in 1939 led to the outbreak of World War II, and by 1941 Nazi forces had occupied much of Europe.

Putin has an agenda and that includes more than Ukraine.

What are you basing this ASSUMPTION on, EXACTLY?

Because "germany" invaded "poland" in 1939 and by 1941 "nazI" forces had occupied much of "europe", or for some other reason?

Age wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 10:03 pm OF COURSE the one known as "age" is NOT to blame for all that is going on in the world. To ASSUME 'that' or to ASSUME 'I' said ANY thing like 'that' is just RIDICULOUS.

Are you saying I misunderstood you when you stated:

I AM to BLAME for absolutely EVERY 'problem', AND ALL the 'mess', in the 'world'. As I KNOW, EXACTLY, HOW TO FULLY CLEAN UP, STOP, and PREVENT, ANY and EVERY 'problem', and 'mess' from ARISING EVER AGAIN. So, I AM TO BLAME because I am NOT actively SHOWING HOW, YET.

Otherwise, I'm not following what you are saying.

iambiguous wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 7:17 pm
Russia invades Ukraine. Now, as philosophers or ethicists or political scientists, is there a way for us using the technical tools at our disposal -- logic, epistemology -- to determine either 1] the optimal frame of mind in reacting to it or 2] the only possible rational assessment period.

As an ethicist might say, all war is evil. While this may mean that there should not be a war, it avoids the reality of an impending war in Ukraine.

It could be said by a logicist that everything that happened so far, even if undesirable, makes sense. Russia wants control of Ukraine. Because of that, though it may not be the only option, Russia invaded Ukraine.

The US, because of a desire not to be involved in a war with Russia, is applying economic sanctions against Russia, It could even be logically predicted that the US will gradually enter another quagmire without an exit strategy.

From an epistemological standpoint, perhaps all is chaos, as neither side can know what the other is doing next.

The attitude to adopt is that once diplomacy fails, war is inevitable. What would be ethical or what should/ought be done is no longer relevant.

How this war will be ended is most likely a tactical question. Once given their marching orders, the generals on both sides can attempt to bring this war to a successful (for their own side) conclusion.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Feb 27, 2022 8:24 pm
If 'you', posters, can NOT just answer ONE question I pose to 'you'...

But you never ask just one question.

Eyes do NOT 'bleed'.

My eyes are bleedin' right now.

what 'you' call MY 'off-putting style' was done PURPOSELY

I don't believe you.