Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No one mentions Dresden.. (you must be related or something...)....
--------------------------------------------------------------------
It is "OK" to do that to the bad guys right? So what if they were innocent citizens?...Right?
... A thread of commonality here.... California writter, with this idea of "savages"... Is the very same line of thinking that time after time has allowed for humanities darkest hours, were we kill and create misery on one another...
... This human condition of self justification is interesting, why so many are programed to feel their viewpoint is the only correct viewpoint is some kind of genetic anomaly... It must be..
Think about it... "We humans are chosen by "god", like we are something special? Heck ants treat each other better than we do! Next "my religion is the path to salvation" again, being selective some of are species are... Next "my race/culture" is the most civilized.. ahhh I see... Next comes my gender is the "superior" gender.. We see that all the time, male dominance...
I find it funny how these people, like California writter do not think anything is a bit unusual that the "correct" way is always their way... How convenient;, their species, their race/culture, their religion, their gender...
It is actually sad, some can be so myopic in their views on this beautiful diverse world we live in...
I wonder what the origins of this genetic anomaly is? I see it in the chickens, a molting or different bird is ostracized by the rest of the flock. You see this same behavior in many animal species, drive away the different, the new..
Folks, sorry to break it to you..... WE are all just animals... Yep, heathen savage animals... Our beliefs, our perceptions, are all just illusion, created in our minds.. Self justification of existence and actions... Simply knee jerk, primal evolutionary actions, no different than a any other animals actions....
Step away from your beliefs and ideals and look at the bigger picture, without preconception... Try to see it all for what it is, without the Vail of belief and preconceived notions.... See things from a perspective other than your own, see it from the perspective of what you are observing...
If you are able to do that, that may be unique to our species... (Don't let it go to your head though...)
---
Sure, True. And here (for the 50th time) is your answer why:
Location: San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties
6,390 posts, read 9,679,297 times
Reputation: 2622
To a tapeworm, a human is only a host.
Throughout history one group of humans have thought they were superior to another group. The end result is violence and death.
In the twentieth century more humans were killed by other humans than in the rest of history all together.
I ran across an estimate of 809 million people killed over religion in our history.
Did you ever wonder why the Muslims hate Christians? As we all know the Muslims are the innocent Christian killing terrorists, right? The interesting part is that vastly more Muslims have been killed by Christians than vice versa. But ultimately, it is one group of superstitious humans killing another group of superstitious humans. One thing we do know, animals do not kill each other for belief.
Lets look at the Crusades, the good Christians liberating the holy land from the Muslim terrorists.
Quote:
Jerusalem conquered 7/15/1099 more than 60,000 victims (Jewish, Muslim, men, women, children). [WW37-40]
In the words of one witness: "there [in front of Solomon's temple] was such a carnage that our people were wading ankle-deep in the blood of our foes", and after that "happily and crying for joy our people marched to our Saviour's tomb, to honour it and to pay off our debt of gratitude."
The Archbishop of Tyre, eye-witness, wrote: "It was impossible to look upon the vast numbers of the slain without horror; everywhere lay fragments of human bodies, and the very ground was covered with the blood of the slain. It was not alone the spectacle of headless bodies and mutilated limbs strewn in all directions that roused the horror of all who looked upon them. Still more dreadful was it to gaze upon the victors themselves, dripping with blood from head to foot, an ominous sight which brought terror to all who met them. It is reported that within the Temple enclosure alone about ten thousand infidels perished." [TG79]
Christian chronicler Eckehard of Aura noted that "even the following summer in all of Palestine the air was polluted by the stench of decomposition". [WW41]
Battle of Askalon, 8/12/1099. Thousands of heathens slaughtered "in the name of Our Lord Jesus Christ". [WW45]
Fourth crusade: 4/12/1204 Constantinople sacked, number of victims unknown, numerous thousands, many of them Christian. [WW141-148]
Acre, the entire city slaughtered by forces under Richard Coeur De Lion 1191
Location: San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties
6,390 posts, read 9,679,297 times
Reputation: 2622
Some here are confusing culture with civilization.
Quote:
To make the distinction unmistakably clear: Civilization is the vital force in human history; culture is that inert mass of institutions and organizations which accumulate around and tend to drag down the advance of life; Civilization is Giordano Bruno facing death by fire; culture is the Cardinal Bellarmino, after ten years of inquisition, sending Bruno to the stake in the Campo di Fiori; Civilization is Sartre; culture Cocteau; Civilization is mutual aid and self-defense; culture is the judge, the lawbook and the forces of Law & Ordure (sic); Civilization is uprising, insurrection, revolution; culture is the war of state against state, or of machines against people, as in Hungary and Vietnam; Civilization is tolerance, detachment and humor, or passion, anger, revenge; culture is the entrance examination, the gas chamber, the doctoral dissertation and the electric chair; Civilization is the Ukrainian peasant Nestor Makhno fighting the Germans, then the Reds, then the Whites, then the Reds again; culture is Stalin and the Fatherland; Civilization is Jesus turning water into wine; culture is Christ walking on the waves; Civilization is a youth with a Molotov cocktail in his hand; culture is the Soviet tank or the L.A. cop that guns him down; Civilization is the wild river; culture, 592,000 tons of cement; Civilization flows; culture thickens and coagulates, like tired, sick, stifled blood.
Right, but when it came down to it, Europeans and others that were civilized, such as East Asians or Middle Easterners made the real leaps in faith, science or the arts. That is what makes civilizations: leaps forward in knowledge and thought in general.
So, on the whole, who really was more civilized? You see, despite the many wars that have occurred in our world (and only a fraction being caused by natives), there have been many advances in critical aspects of society. Remember that such wars are the result of madmen...the will of a single man can alter history forever. Thus society in general is still civilized and still not savage.
Civilization is not simply evidenced by what some call arts, the sciences,etc. At best that shows some were civilized enough to produce such even in a savage world. Leaps in faith definitely would not be a mark of such, as the endless religious wars of the European Nations have showed. Look at how many who made leaps in science were cruelly treated by their own Governments, religious institutions and even neighbors. Did the individual's efforts make his neighbors, etc civilized or was he the one who was civilized in a savage environment? Ask Galileo as an example.
Pushing off savage acts endorsed and applauded by a Nation, on a few or one madman, simply does not work. Who was the madman that decided Hiroshima or Nagasaki was civilized. Who agreed the fire bombing of Dresden and Cologne in WWII by the US and it's allies was civilized?
How many spoke against these actions? Would not civilized people have done so?
Folks, sorry to break it to you..... WE are all just animals... Yep, heathen savage animals... Our beliefs, our perceptions, are all just illusion, created in our minds.. Self justification of existence and actions... Simply knee jerk, primal evolutionary actions, no different than a any other animals actions....
Reason #52935503648 why attempting a conversation with a liberal is a total waste of time. If all beliefs, perceptions etc. are just illusions created in our minds, why bother? Why argue with anyone? There's no "there" there anyway, right?
Reason #52935503648 why attempting a conversation with a liberal is a total waste of time. If all beliefs, perceptions etc. are just illusions created in our minds, why bother? Why argue with anyone? There's no "there" there anyway, right?
Hey Pilgrim,
First off thanks.. Some of the threads you start have social issues that are good for all of us to contemplate...
While I may disagree with your viewpoint the majority of the time, I do not consider it a waste of time... I participate to help expand my viewpoint, which is constantly evolving.. By listening to viewpoints different than mine with as open of a mind as humanly possible, I feel I am simply "practicing what I preach."
I resist the desire to "convert" others to my way of thinking. I just hope others can be open enough to at least see the perspective........ On illusions, think about it, we can both look at the same piece of art and see different aspects that are important to us... It is all the same piece of art, but we see different things, we have different values so on and so forth... Maybe the word perception is less disturbing?
That is a good question why argue with anyone? Again, I see it as genetic primal code to try and get others to be like ones self, or to become like the others in a group.... Very primal indeed.
Did I use "there" instead of "their" somewhere? Or are you referring to some kind of definition of heaven or something? I am left guessing at your point..?
I do not consider my self "liberal". Maybe I agree with liberals frequently in this day and age, but is more about how "conservatives" have changed in the last 20 years... I do not see much of the Lincoln type Republican in today's "conservatives".
On illusions, think about it, we can both look at the same piece of art and see different aspects that are important to us... It is all the same piece of art, but we see different things, we have different values so on and so forth... Maybe the word perception is less disturbing?
Perception and illusion are two entirely different things. Perception relates to an objective reality of some kind. Illusion implies that the reality being perceived doesn't exist.
If you don't believe that reality exists apart from the human mind's perception of it, then nothing matters and discussion is pointless.
Before starting a conversation with a liberal about anything, you need to make sure he agrees with the following:
1. Reality and truth exist - objectively, apart from human perception.
2. Reality and truth are knowable.
3. Reality and truth matter.
If the liberal agrees with these propositions, he might still be a liberal, but he's an old-fashioned classical liberal along the lines of Lord Acton, Erasmus, Locke, the American Founding Fathers, and so forth. Conversation is possible (if the liberal chooses to engage in one - most don't).
If the liberal does not agree with one or more of these propositions, he's a "post-modernist" liberal - essentially he's a nihilist, a radical solipsist. Conversation is utterly pointless.
Before starting a conversation with a liberal about anything, you need to make sure he agrees with the following:
1. Reality and truth exist - objectively, apart from human perception.
2. Reality and truth are knowable.
3. Reality and truth matter.
If the liberal agrees with these propositions, he might still be a liberal, but he's an old-fashioned classical liberal along the lines of Lord Acton, Erasmus, Locke, the American Founding Fathers, and so forth. Conversation is possible (if the liberal chooses to engage in one - most don't).
If the liberal does not agree with one or more of these propositions, he's a "post-modernist" liberal - essentially he's a nihilist, a radical solipsist. Conversation is utterly pointless.
Somebody got a Dymo Label-Maker for Chirstmas ... Wheee ... Now he knows what is in every box in his closet ...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Next comes my gender is the "superior" gender.. We see that all the time, male dominance... 
)
