Pacifism; Brave or Naive

I quote: "But more people benefit from my selfishness than yours. ... The reward comes many generations after I am gone."

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

CA, bad choice of words then. My bad. I realize I am making just as much of an assumption as you. But assumptions have alot to do with outcome... So what you are assuming may just be a self-fulfilling prophecy... If this is the case, which I assume it is, then I would rather assume peace is possible.

It's really the age old saying used by mothers everywhere. "Two wrongs don't make a right." Think about the logic of it;

1. X is wrong
2. Person A is going to commit X to Person B
3. Person B commits X to Person A first
4. X is still commited

1. X is wrong
2. Person A commits X to Person B
3. Person B commits X to Person A
4. X is still commited, TWICE

1. X is wrong
2. Person A commits X to Person B
3. Person C commits X to Person A
4. X is still commited, twice between THREE people

Murder is wrong. Context does not matter, only justifies (there you go Empty, I'm handing this one to you on a silver platter

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

As were the couplet:

• "As I stated earlier, there are RARE situations which I think violence may be the ONLY answer and which it is worth the ends. This would be one. Not 20 innocent peole, but 20 million... "
• "The higher the number, the more I can understand the need to kill the dictator, but not condone it."

You cannot condone the killing of Hitler/Hirohito, but (a) vote against disallowing police use of deadly force, and (b) acknowledge that, in some cases "violence may be the ONLY answer".

Do you truly not find this incoherent? Or is this another "bad choice of words"?

Yes, let us 'be open to the possibilities' ... This is the inane sophistry common among young new age theists and Roswell enthusiasts, and is little more than a weak variant of the argument from ignorance. We'll nobly let the 20 die because, after all, we don't know that this act will not lead us to a new world where man and whales will live in peace.

My mother, whose husband fought the Nazis and Imperial Japan, was never so ethically confused or socially irresponsible.

So, having accepted cases where "violence may be the ONLY answer and which it is worth the ends", you now prattle about "Two wrongs don't make a right." and "Context does not matter". Tell the survivors of Buchenwald and Pearl Harbor that context doesn't matter.

Context is everything. It is context, for example, that aids society in distinguishing between killing and murder.

[edited for grammar - CA]

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

"Pacifism" is a nice term for not having the balls to defend other people.

 

Very likely to errupt in violence agian. Violence is like wild fire it consumes.

No. I stated that it would take strenght to hold on to the beleif. It take strenght for a christain to have faith in good. Because you believe it so strongly does it make it truth?

If a race is inslaved it is more likley that they will adopt the minds of slaves. Not all have that strength to resist. Human hearts are fragile.

Oxymoron.

Never said that. I said debating pacifism over violence is like debating yin vs. yang.

The point is to defend. The point is to remove your family from that situation. Is that hatred? I say once again do you think he wanted to kill?

My choice will be made at the time of action. I cannot say how I will act. I do not make rules for myself to abide to. I do not know the circumstances of such and event so anything I say is meaningless. Can you say for cetain that you will not kill?

You have both a heart and a head they work together in balance to best resolve a situation. It will include both head and heart. But it would be instantanious. Under such situations yoru midn works much faster. You don't have time to sit there and debate you have only a fraction of a second to act. Blink and its all over. You have either failed or succeded.

Is the problem the act or the motivation?

As I said before it would leave the world like a power keg ready to errupt in extreme violence once more. In the end I think it would cause more suffering and pain.

What do we call human?
Of, relating to, or characteristic of humans: the course of human events; the human race.
Having or showing those positive aspects of nature and character regarded as distinguishing humans from other animals: an act of human kindness.
Subject to or indicative of the weaknesses, imperfections, and fragility associated with humans: a mistake that shows he's only human; human frailty.
Having the form of a human?

Please don't leave parts of my post out when you attempt to refute them.

 

Quite frankly I'm sick of repeating the same points over and over. We're getting nowhere. I try to give you a little leeway and CA jumps all over me for being inconsistent, and rightfully so. My point is that pacism will only come to be if people work for it, so while you argue that pacifism is not possible, it is only because people like you believe it.

Some quotes on the subject:

"The time to win a fight is before it starts"

"Whenever one finds himself inclined to bitterness, it is a sign of emotional failure"

"You can't hold a man down without staying down with him"

Only as high as I reach can I grow
Only as far as I seek can I go
Only as deep as I look can I see
Only as much as I dream can I be

"The more a man knows the more he forgives" - Confucius

"A man who raises his fists is a man who's run out of ideas"

"To be wronged is nothing unless you continue to remember it" - Confucius

"Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes" - Muhatma Gandhi

Well I'm done, at least for a while. Firefly, Truthseeker, Tiassa, any of you want to take over for me? Well, it's been fun guys, but I think we can all agree after 7 pages, we've gotten nowhere...

 

Only? One would have thought that sociopaths and social miscreants deserved at least some of your scorn. Perhaps not.

"Malice is rare.- Most people are far too much occupied with themselves to be malicious." - Nietzsche

I haven't a clue what that has to do with the topic but, then again, I haven't a clue why someone would think that a laundry list of aphorisms was useful as anything beyond a source of amusement.

 

Notme I believe now we have truely started to dwell into this subject. Please return to help further the debate. Please do not act contemptuously. Much of these quotes are statments that can be refuted. This action seems very presumptuous to the nature of this subject. We are philosphers, we are after the truth. Not to have it dressed to our predilection. We shall hold the truth in high esteem no matter what it may be. So I ask please return to continue this debate. So as to further both of our understanding.

 

I've found pacifists have given violence a chance and aren't at all inept at it. They simply find the other side (pacifism) better.

 

Present me with something that doesn't require me to say the same thing I've been saying for the past 7 pages, and I'll be glad to continue this debate.

 

If you've said the same thing for the past 7 pages, you obviously didn't find anything compelling and/or challenging in the arguments raised against your position. I find that to be remarkable.

 

I am sorry Notme too be quiet frank there has been many differint points made against total pacifism.
You have yet to even attempt refuting them.
At this point your argument does seem like words of a sophist.

 

Sorry I failed to address this - see RELIGIOUS SOCIETY OF FRIENDS

 

Present me with those arguments against pacifism please...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

First of all, I wasn't arguing for TOTAL pacifism. Secondly, I did not state that you were making the statement over and over, but that my response was the same for every point made. Murder is wrong. I don't see the need to repeat it. You can give me a million situations, but I still say murder is wrong. You can see this getting tiring, no?

 

If you murder a murderer you become a murderer. Very simple.

 

In fact, banal.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

And yet everyone seems to be completly ignorant about my above statement...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Given that it's gibberish, yes....

 

Oh really? So you kill someone and you are not a murderer? What is the definition of a murderer??:bugeye: