Page 15 of 28 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 274

Thread: The World is Stupid

  1. Top | #141
    Sapere aude Politesse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Chochenyo Territory, US
    Posts
    6,170
    Rep Power
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by Emily Lake View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KeepTalking View Post

    You are incorrect, none of those things is force.
    Do they constitute coercion?
    Tautological. "Coercion" by definition refers to the use of force.
    "Banish me from Eden when you will, but first let me eat of the tree of knowledge."

  2. Top | #142
    Sapere aude Politesse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Chochenyo Territory, US
    Posts
    6,170
    Rep Power
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post

    Social pressure and public shaming is also force. People losing their jobs because of opinions they express is force. Deplatforming is force.



    You're taking my statements and making them absolute, even when they don't fit. And then poking fun at it. Stop doing that and then it'll make sense.

    I'm also very much in favour of the allies defeating Hitler. I don't think USA and the Brits have anything to be ashamed about for standing up to Hitler. I don't think the 75 million lives lost in WW2 was the sole responsibility of Churchill and Roosevelt. Hitler and Hirohito shares most of the blame. Even though they were the "innocent victims" the allies attacked unprovoked.

    I think that the Taleban and Saddam Hussein carry more responsibility for the lives lost than the allies who invaded. Just my little opinion.
    And then you try to equivocate pointed rudeness in public as "force" as though that made it equivalent to state violence... in the same post as accusing me of "taking your statements and making them absolute". If we invade a country, that's the fault of the dictator who runs it no matter who dies in the process. But if a racist loses their job, that's the fault of the "Woke", not their own, and a hideous moral travesty besides. It's perfectly okay for a country to murder thousands to combat racism, but writing a letter of complaint to a game show to combat racism is a bridge too far. You have a fascinating array of contradictory positions. It would be funny if it weren't in service of racial bigotry.
    At least you now understand my reasoning, even if you don't agree. I'm cool with that though. People being allowed to disagree on not punished for it is the hill I'm willing to die on.

    Cheers
    Specifically, about racism. You spend much of your free time trying to stamp out "Wokeness", so you obviously don't consider all disagreement acceptable.
    "Banish me from Eden when you will, but first let me eat of the tree of knowledge."

  3. Top | #143
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    31,283
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    73,756
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
    I actually don't think it's sarcastic, ironic, satirical or self contradictory. I want to be tolerated. I want to live in a country and a world where people are tolerated. Hitler and Stalin aren't tolerant leaders. Therefore invading them is justified. Being tolerant doesn't mean putting up with any shit. It means fighting for a society that is tolerant. If my tolerance leads me to tolerate something that makes the world less tolerant, then my tolerance is self defeating. So obviously that's not the type of tolerance I'm for.

    It's fair to say that I'm militantly tolerant.
    I think you are mistaking the terms tolerance and indifference. You complain about people having strong opinions and expressing them, both verbally and structurally.

    You want people to tolerate bigotry. You aren't for it, but just that people should tolerate it, otherwise, we aren't tolerant.

  4. Top | #144
    Contributor DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    9,229
    Archived
    5,746
    Total Posts
    14,975
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post

    At least you now understand my reasoning, even if you don't agree. I'm cool with that though. People being allowed to disagree on not punished for it is the hill I'm willing to die on.

    Cheers
    Specifically, about racism. You spend much of your free time trying to stamp out "Wokeness", so you obviously don't consider all disagreement acceptable.
    Again, I'm not mindlessly tolerant. You could say that I'm intolerant of intolerance. Because it makes the world less tolerant.

    I also think its an endless battle. Tolerance requires bravery and intellectual curiosity. Both require effort. So the instinct will always be away from tolerance.

    Once intolerance comes in vogue it can go very wrong fast. Its worth fighting against imho.

  5. Top | #145
    Contributor DrZoidberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    9,229
    Archived
    5,746
    Total Posts
    14,975
    Rep Power
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
    I actually don't think it's sarcastic, ironic, satirical or self contradictory. I want to be tolerated. I want to live in a country and a world where people are tolerated. Hitler and Stalin aren't tolerant leaders. Therefore invading them is justified. Being tolerant doesn't mean putting up with any shit. It means fighting for a society that is tolerant. If my tolerance leads me to tolerate something that makes the world less tolerant, then my tolerance is self defeating. So obviously that's not the type of tolerance I'm for.

    It's fair to say that I'm militantly tolerant.
    I think you are mistaking the terms tolerance and indifference. You complain about people having strong opinions and expressing them, both verbally and structurally.

    You want people to tolerate bigotry. You aren't for it, but just that people should tolerate it, otherwise, we aren't tolerant.
    What's the alternative? Bigotry is an opinion. We can't force people to change their minds. We can only control whether they express it or not. I believe that unchallenged bigotry leads to more bigotry. So by tolerating bigotry I think we will get less bigotry.

    If you aren't able to convince people by words alone, chances are that the problem is that you are wrong. It's always better to have a free discussion

  6. Top | #146
    Aethiopian Gospel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,113
    Archived
    138
    Total Posts
    1,251
    Rep Power
    52
    Word salad is no reason to avoid vegetarianism, but it sure is convincing.

  7. Top | #147
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,746
    Archived
    229
    Total Posts
    3,975
    Rep Power
    70
    15 pages over a single incident and it's the world that's stupid.

  8. Top | #148
    Contributor Trausti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northwest
    Posts
    8,154
    Archived
    372
    Total Posts
    8,526
    Rep Power
    67
    Thank you for your contribution.

  9. Top | #149
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Located 100 miles east of A in America
    Posts
    31,283
    Archived
    42,473
    Total Posts
    73,756
    Rep Power
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Higgins View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DrZoidberg View Post
    I actually don't think it's sarcastic, ironic, satirical or self contradictory. I want to be tolerated. I want to live in a country and a world where people are tolerated. Hitler and Stalin aren't tolerant leaders. Therefore invading them is justified. Being tolerant doesn't mean putting up with any shit. It means fighting for a society that is tolerant. If my tolerance leads me to tolerate something that makes the world less tolerant, then my tolerance is self defeating. So obviously that's not the type of tolerance I'm for.

    It's fair to say that I'm militantly tolerant.
    I think you are mistaking the terms tolerance and indifference. You complain about people having strong opinions and expressing them, both verbally and structurally.

    You want people to tolerate bigotry. You aren't for it, but just that people should tolerate it, otherwise, we aren't tolerant.
    What's the alternative? Bigotry is an opinion. We can't force people to change their minds. We can only control whether they express it or not. I believe that unchallenged bigotry leads to more bigotry. So by tolerating bigotry I think we will get less bigotry.

    If you aren't able to convince people by words alone, chances are that the problem is that you are wrong. It's always better to have a free discussion
    By words alone? Pretty certain using words is force too! In fact having an opposing opinion to that of an opponent is force.

    Best to be beatniks daddy-o.

  10. Top | #150
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    23,346
    Archived
    16,553
    Total Posts
    39,899
    Rep Power
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by Politesse View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Emily Lake View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KeepTalking View Post

    You are incorrect, none of those things is force.
    Do they constitute coercion?
    Tautological. "Coercion" by definition refers to the use of force.
    There can be passive coercion.

    You can withhold things needed, like food, unless work is done first.

    You can arrange a whole society that does this.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •