Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (33094)	10/15/2001 6:05:47 PM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 82486

Gotta go!

To: Neocon who wrote (33094)	10/15/2001 6:37:14 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

The flaw is the assumption that people primarily get violent or abusive about ideas, or in proportion as they are convinced. Certainly people get violent or abusive in response to greed or anger or other emotions or temptations with no ideals needed but I thought the conversation was about violence in response to ideals or for a cause. As for it not being self-evident that agnosticism will lead to reasonable, tolerant people, I think I would agree with that idea. Certainly they can be just as unreasonable or intolerant about other issues, or just in response to emotions or desires as anyone else can be. I think they can also be intolerant about their agnosticism (thinking that only idiots would believe anything about God, or something like that), but I still think on the balance agnostics are more likely to be tolerant about different views about God. I don't think we are likely to see any radical violent intolerant agnostic group blowing people up in the name of agnosticism. Tim

To: Neocon who wrote (33094)	10/16/2001 3:09:44 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

It's really hard to go into battle with a straight face if you don't absolutely believe in your cause. That's not to say that the soldiers always believe- but the people sending the soldiers usually do. If you think your opinions are iffy, and your cause is doubtful, I don't see that as launching a great war. It usually take the pompous arrogance of "God is on OUR side..." to do that. But of course, I will be interested in any proof that can be offered- bring up just one leader who launched a war knowing his cause was iffy and doubtful and the other guys position was just as meritorious. I can offer proof for many leaders (often on opposite sides of the same war) who declared and seemed to believe God was on their side, and theirs was the only TRUE cause. I suggest that people who do not think this, do not make good warriors. And since I wish there were no warriors, I wish everyone thought that way. Humans being the rapacious and violent animals they are, I do not think it likely that a majority of them will begin to think in the broadminded way I would like them to. Not that there is anything absolutely right about that. Violence is an effective strategy. It can often out compete peace. Maybe peace and tolerance are maladaptive.