Philosophy Now Forum

Belinda wrote: ↑Wed Mar 11, 2020 10:06 am Walker, I don't pretend to be an exemplar. I can endure but I am more a follower than a leader.

I have been thinking about why you and Henry and others make rude jokes about such as Greta Thunberg. She and others like her are making a stand against death and disorder. You and Henry and others of the same political persuasion take refuge in narrow tribalism. I don't know what can be done about this. I don't even know what has caused some people in this day and age to be tribal, apart from fascism which itself may be nothing but a rationalisation of fear and regress.

Walker wrote: ↑Wed Mar 11, 2020 12:13 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Wed Mar 11, 2020 10:06 am Walker, I don't pretend to be an exemplar. I can endure but I am more a follower than a leader.

I have been thinking about why you and Henry and others make rude jokes about such as Greta Thunberg. She and others like her are making a stand against death and disorder. You and Henry and others of the same political persuasion take refuge in narrow tribalism. I don't know what can be done about this. I don't even know what has caused some people in this day and age to be tribal, apart from fascism which itself may be nothing but a rationalisation of fear and regress.

What you call rude jokes are stoic responses, which makes Henry and I situation-appropriate to the thread.

Don’t worry, Greta is free to be a fool. Her kooky haranguing is just a dull, limp thread in the otherwise vibrant and dynamic tableaux of life, a bit of drab next to the glitter, easily woven into this age of over-hyped media jockeys such as Greta, with skills learned by any schoolboy who totes around memories of for instance, a bitter spinster hissing “hush!” in the school library, an observation sure to prompt a resounding yeah or two.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Mar 11, 2020 2:56 pm Speakin' of schoolboys: what happened to that lil shit, David Hogg? Same thing that's gonna happen to Greta, I imagine.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Mar 11, 2020 4:58 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Mar 11, 2020 2:56 pm Speakin' of schoolboys: what happened to that lil shit, David Hogg? Same thing that's gonna happen to Greta, I imagine.

These climate activists...they're so messed up.

They advocate things like a city system of diesel trucks to pick up balloons of air (bottles), and then can only recycle 1/4 of them, so send the other 3/4 off to the landfill in another diesel truck. And they advocate for windmills, which are murder on birds, to generate electricity that is surplus. They drive electric automobiles that due to their batteries, tires and manufacture, actually have a larger carbon footprint than the gas ones. They buy electronics that rely on heavy metals poisonous to the environment and impossible to recycle sustainably. And they won't talk about China (which produces at least a third of the world's carbon footprint, currently, or India, which is poised to compete with it) or the Middle East, where much of the oil is produced, but want to score points in Canada, the UK or Sweden, where the problem can't really be solved.

And they use mentally-ill teenagers to do their work, because really, only a mentally-ill teenager would believe their nonsense.

IF human beings have a role in climate change, there is but one way it will be addressed: reduced consumption. Period. But nobody talks about that, because we all want to keep buying stuff, while pretending we're all fixing the environment at the same time.

I've said this before: but manifestly, no conversation about alleged human-caused climate change that does not begin with the words, "China and India" is even serious.

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri Mar 13, 2020 10:19 am It's not only in America we find individuals with the generally- regressive world view . I would like to know the social causes of the generally-regressive world view, and also the causes of the opposite i.e. the progressive view.

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri Mar 13, 2020 10:19 am Henry Q, Walker and Immanuel Can share the same world view which includes love for Mr Trump and disdain for Greta Thunberg, and other attributes of the same cluster of ideas that includes e.g.private ownership of guns , and suchlike.

I wonder to what extent this particular world view (I don't know what to call this world view without sounding prejudiced) this particular world view as propounded by Henry, Walker, and Immanuel has caused its supporters to believe as they do, or whether individuals who believe as they do caused the world view.

It's not only in America we find individuals with the generally- regressive world view . I would like to know the social causes of the generally-regressive world view, and also the causes of the opposite i.e. the progressive view.

I understand the USA is a special case as here there is still historical peculiar distrust by the more 'colonised' states of the intellectual east coast.We see a picture of this effect when we look at the map with coloured-in red and blue states. However there are other divided societies around the world. How does libertarianism take root in hearts and minds?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Fri Mar 13, 2020 11:27 am ...that sez way more about the commentator than it does her targets.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Fri Mar 13, 2020 11:33 am

henry quirk wrote: ↑Fri Mar 13, 2020 11:27 am ...that sez way more about the commentator than it does her targets.

Nah. It goes both ways.

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri Mar 13, 2020 10:19 am(I don't know what to call this world view without sounding prejudiced)

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Wed Mar 11, 2020 4:58 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Wed Mar 11, 2020 2:56 pm Speakin' of schoolboys: what happened to that lil shit, David Hogg? Same thing that's gonna happen to Greta, I imagine.

These climate activists...they're so messed up.

They advocate things like a city system of diesel trucks to pick up balloons of air (bottles), and then can only recycle 1/4 of them, so send the other 3/4 off to the landfill in another diesel truck. And they advocate for windmills, which are murder on birds, to generate electricity that is surplus. They drive electric automobiles that due to their batteries, tires and manufacture, actually have a larger carbon footprint than the gas ones. They buy electronics that rely on heavy metals poisonous to the environment and impossible to recycle sustainably. And they won't talk about China (which produces at least a third of the world's carbon footprint, currently, or India, which is poised to compete with it) or the Middle East, where much of the oil is produced, but want to score points in Canada, the UK or Sweden, where the problem can't really be solved.

And they use mentally-ill teenagers to do their work, because really, only a mentally-ill teenager would believe their nonsense.

IF human beings have a role in climate change, there is but one way it will be addressed: reduced consumption. Period. But nobody talks about that, because we all want to keep buying stuff, while pretending we're all fixing the environment at the same time.

I've said this before: but manifestly, no conversation about alleged human-caused climate change that does not begin with the words, "China and India" is even serious.

There is a tension between the above two views. Our desire for simplicity is in direct conflict with the complexity of truth.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Fri Mar 13, 2020 11:27 am Commentary...

Belinda wrote: ↑Fri Mar 13, 2020 10:19 am Henry Q, Walker and Immanuel Can share the same world view which includes love for Mr Trump and disdain for Greta Thunberg, and other attributes of the same cluster of ideas that includes e.g.private ownership of guns , and suchlike.

How does libertarianism take root in hearts and minds?