how the nature of information shapes evolution, life and culture of humans
worth more than an update...
because, yes, that's the library of stories Bush's words of the "freedom in Iraq" in front of the best informed audience tells...
The Ballad of ...George: "But this guy is so..."
or...
"There were, by my count, no less than twenty different moments in the last few days where George brought shame and disgrace upon this country."
Proud America, you are still alive and of sound mind...
thank you
posted by Again at 1:26 AM
physicist, born in the land of the poets and thinkers, knowing how information coins information processing systems and how information processing systems coin information - i had to become a philosopher. Because me and you, our bodies, our souls, our families and nations, our cultures and our companies are nothing else than information processing systems.
And then, one Thursday, nearly two thousand years after one man had been nailed to a tree for saying how great it would be to be nice to people for a change, one girl sitting on her own in a small cafe in Rickmansworth suddenly realized what it was that had been going wrong all this time, and she finally knew how the world could be made a good and happy place. This time it was right, it would work, and no one would have to get nailed to anything. Sadly, however, before she could get to a phone to tell anyone about it, a terribly stupid catastrophe occurred, and the idea was lost forever.
This is not her story.
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Introduction
by Douglas Adams ©
The definition of information as set of repeatable behavior of a given object is not only valuable for explaining existing knowledge, but doesn't exclude future knowledge.
If a witch would come and would be able to show, that witchcraft works, it would be "information" as Newtons law are.
Why? Because if something works, it works every time, you use it. If witchcraft would work, the witch would be able to get the same result whenever she would use her tricks.
So never say: "that can't be true, that is impossible."
Say: "Show me...
again."
"physics of information"
ISBN 3-935031-03-3 ©
A public school teacher was arrested today at John F. Kennedy International Airport as he attempted to board a flight while in possession of a ruler, a protractor, a set square, a slide rule and a calculator.
At a morning press conference, Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez said he believes the man is a member of the notorious Al-gebra movement. He did not identify the man, who has been charged by the FBI with carrying weapons of math instruction.
"Al-gebra is a problem for us," Gonzales said. "They desire solutions by means and extremes, and sometimes go off on tangents in a search of absolute value. They use secret code names like 'x' and 'y' and refer to themselves as 'unknowns', but we have determined they belong to a common denominator of the axis of medieval with coordinates in every country. As the Greek philanderer Isosceles used to say, 'There are 3 sides to every triangle'."
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld backed up the Attorney General's words. "Al-gebra is really a problem for us. One of the worst beliefs of this group is that they want their women to greatly multiply."
When asked to comment on the arrest, President Bush said, "If God had wanted us to have better weapons of math instruction, He would have given us more fingers and toes."
Florida Governor and the president's brother Jeb Bush, no stranger counts and recounts himself had no comment.
White House aides told reporters they could not recall a more intelligent or profound statement by the president...
ever.
Spam will be deleted without a trace
A Shadow of Itself
Money versus Miners
Bridges, Steam Pipes and Taxes
Daily Life or The Way The World Goes
Varus – Or: To Each Rome Its Own Teutoburg
Who needs terrorists with…?
Schlauraffenland
t*t
Ubuntu
The Battle on Global Warming
How to Kill Memes…
Innuendo – From Death of the Bees, Democracy and The G8
To Chuck – From Barnita With Love
Political futility or Which Memes to Replicate?
Big Bang or Little Red Spot Of The Universe
Back To The Roots
Blogs That Make Me Think
Peri physeos
Treaty of Peace and Friendship, Article 11
Dear Brothers – USA & China
Death of Democracy
Do you…
ULS
A Plot for a Science Fiction Novel
Red Moon
On the Tombstone of Humankind – too little and too...
Just an Aside
A better offer: 25 Million
Inflation – The Value of 30 Pieces of Silver in 20...
Megalomania - The Perfect Recipe For Commiting Suicide
The Last Chance Democracy Cafe
Future of Blogs
Information, Entropy and the conservation of...
On the Edge of History
Happy Celebration!
It is Happening
Why did you do this to us?
Love
Priority Test
Land of the Dead
The Augian Stables
Moment of Truth
It's Happening
The Lord, Who Has All Power In Heaven And On Earth
By Their Deeds You Shall Know Them
S.3930
Survival of the Losers
Please, excuse me, Riverbend
Souls of Machines
Gaia and Her Avatar
$100 Billion A Year
Reversibility - or - How to judge human interaction
Quotes of Voltaire
Two kinds of people
What happened to "No American Left Behind"?
Developing country
Hard Times for Proud Americans (2)...
Hard Times for Proud Americans...
Mules and Hinnies
Wanted: A New Concept for Society - or - Why Philosophy matters
For Whom The Bell Tolls
Living in a Kafka World
It's not just me... - Favorite Quotes (2)
Priorities
Lord of the Riders
Omnia apud me mathematica fiunt
Math beats Faith - And they shall be known by their deeds
Rush for the Darwin Award
How urgently the world needs a bright view (2)
How urgently the world needs a bright view
Black Holes and High Intelligence
Do you want to live?
Hope vs. Anger
Favorite Quotes
A reply, never written
Stop thinking positive, stop limiting your thoughts!
IKI - Infinity Kills Information
White Roses or Reductio ad absurdum (2)
The Power of Pictures: Scientia est potentia
What if?
Gaia
Justice
Why are there no slave rebellions?
Cassandra and Bertrands Paradox
The Frog and the Boiling Pot
January, 01
December, 21
Yin and Yang
Roots of Rites
Do you know Freud?
A Star called Casimir
Plants and Animals
Chaperone
Death
Future of Humankind
Sound of The Ages
Spider of the universe - Information
Fata Morgana
Figures lie and liars figure
Reductio ad absurdum
Katrina
How to define information
Parting the Sea
Pars Pro Toto
84 Comments:
... He did not do this by being too tough, or too soft, or too strident. He did this simply by being himself. His head is an echo chamber where very stupid bats roost. He has the intellect of a bag of rocks. ==== Again: Yep, that's our presi-DUNCE. Will Pitt has him dead to rights there -- as undeniable "Moron-in-Chief." ===== Sadly, there's little cause for pride and *plenty* of reason for shame here in America. The US Congress -- BOTH houses -- this week virtually unanimously endorsed resolutions that offer unreserved *support* to the ongoing campaign of genocide Israel has undertaken in Lebanon. Obviously, DECENCY (and our own best interest) relentlessly takes a "back seat" to the prurient endorsement of Israel's national interests in the Capitol! ==== No, I'm still very much ashamed of this country -- disgusted by the hypocrites in Washington and elsewhere who would actually support the atrocities of both the US *and* Israeli branches of the NeoConNazi Party, turning a "blind eye" to utter savagery. .
nemo
Sadly, there's little cause for pride and *plenty* of reason for shame here in America.
don't you see, that exactly THAT is proof for the pride of America? To be able to feel ashamed is the best proof that pride exists. Otherwise you would say: oh, that's not that bad, or oh, shit happens or oh, he is just a politician and we live in a democracy and the next president will do it better or some other excuses...
to feel ashamed because the representant - face and mouth of America - represents poorly to sadly is therefore something good ;-)
offer unreserved *support* to the ongoing campaign of genocide Israel has undertaken in Lebanon
most of the western world do "offer unreserved support" - i was ashamed to see it in nearly every newspapers, "that war is the best solution"....
they never learn - and they are too stupid to see that it isn't "weak pacifism" which rejects war, but simply the wish of the intelligence to control the future. They don't get it, that HITLER CREATED ISRAEL simply by being so stupid as to use superbrute force - they don't get it, that without the Holocaust the other nations, so uncaringly rejecting the fleeing jews (remember the St. Louis?), feel ashamed and tried to calm their guilty consciences (and accusing citizens) by the gift of the Holy Land (that, btw, didn't cost them much, because it wasn't THEIR land)...
without Hitler - no Israel
and the story of the stupid wars/brute forces goes on and on...
without the Shah (paid by USA) no Khomeini in Iran, no "nukes" and dangers from the East for poor Israel
without the Taliban - used (trained and paid) against the USSR - no Bin Laden, no 09/11
without Israels "Poland-Assault" (Lebanon) no Hezbollah
you know how to "measure" intelligence? By the range of time an intelligence can oversee. Because intelligence is the conquest of the future, the higher the intelligence, the farer you can extrapolate current actions into the future...
but to see that war is counterproductive you have to be able to look at least 5-10 years into future and that's much too much for the PPs (prostitutes of power) - Hitler and the Jews - about 30-50 years, the Taliban and 09/11 - about 20 years, the Hezbollah and the Lebanon-assault - about 5 (?) years...
why can't Israel see that they may "give birth" to the next "reason for war"? And the more wars the more chances to be killed...
even for the "actual superpowers" - think of 1942, the time when German liberals committed suicide because they couldn't imagine that anyone could stop Hitler...
the time, when the Jews were the poor, helpless victims...
but times change...
and war/brute force does change them in an unforeseeable way, in an uncontrolled way
Hitler, the midwife of Israel...
and Israel - whose midwife will she be - her own hangman's?
war - the tool of the low species like ants - proof for lack of intelligence
and i guess, the "Moron-in-Chief", as you called him - the lover of death-penalty and war (at least if war is far away) proves that simple fact better than anything else
What is it that you are recommending now? Weeping a wailing and knashing of teeth do not sway the Hexbollahs, AQs, Hamas jihadists of the world. Apeasement only creates yet another pretext for going for more and more. Why is it that the West, in particular, Israel and the US (the rest are passive-to-cowardly)MUST "TURN THE OTHER CHEEK" in your stated ideas when they are bombed, people are killed, and others kidnapped and usually tortured and gutted, by these fanatics? Are you willing to give away the free world to the jihadists? Or just Israel and her 3 million or so people? And, if Israel is wiped off the map, as has been threatened, what is next?
Europe is next. Muslims will be a majority in Europe by 2050, and solidly in political control, hence will be demanding sharia throughout the EU, and dhimmitude for non-muslims. Unless the staunch, militaristic, and patriotic citizens of the EU stand up to them and fight for their non-muslim way of life. Talking about looking into the future, 2050 or so is looming as the end of Europe as we know it. It is thier choice to accept being conquered from within, or turning around and fighting their way out of the problem. this is not of US or Israel doing, it is the Islamic fundamentalists goal to destroy the West and create a new Caliphate that rules under Islamic law.
I wish your passive approach lots of luck.
Again: I posted a copy of this on Robert's blog, but wanted to make *sure* you saw it. It's from a physicist colleague in the US, and presents a breathtakingly frightful scenario which, tragically, seems all too plausible! (Possibly the ONLY point I would question is the ultimate likelihood of Russia and China ever disarming in the face of US aggression.) It's extremely well-sourced, and I believe the distinguished professor truly SEES the utterly barbaric type of gamesmanship that's actually afoot here: Nuke Iran, Blame the Jews : Who Benefits from the Israel-Lebanon Flare-Up?
"... Unless the staunch, militaristic, and patriotic citizens of the EU stand up to them and fight for their non-muslim way of life." ==== Well, the cat's certainly out of the bag now, eh? Finally, MaKKKing has exhibited his true colors, with a stunning display of utterly unrestrained, *Neo-Nazi* rhetoric (injected as mere "disagreement"). The rest of his frothing rant, of course, is substanceless HORSESHIT, as usual -- merely inflammatory building of his "straw man" in preparation for the inevitable punch line, "Therefore, we MUST kill them before they kill us." ==== MaNNNing, why don't you do the *whole* world a big favor and just DROP DEAD?! I'm quite sure the rest of us could probably get along reasonably *well* without the dubious "advice" of low-life racist scum like yourself. You are truly a pathetic excuse for a "human being".
mannning
I wish your passive approach lots of luck.
sorry, please...
to whom did you reply? Your response seems to fit to neither my post nor nemos...
passive-to-cowardly....
i'm not Michael Fox in Back to the Future III <griiiin>
Muslims will be a majority in Europe by 2050
2050?
Know the Pentagon Report?
oh that philosophy of the 100% determinism, never realizing that informative cycles - creating the small pieces of determinism in this universe - can end...
Strange how such a preoccupation can cloud minds...
even in intelligent souls ;-)
Ostrich feathers!
"most of the western world do "offer unreserved support" - i was ashamed to see it in nearly every newspapers, "that war is the best solution"...."
In the end, against Islamic fundamentalists there is only one way out: kill or be killed. Reason has scant chance of deflecting, even temporarily, their push to dominance. Unless, of course, they are in danger of being defeated. Then they will cry for a ceasefire, not to end the war on a long-term basis, but to gain time to regroup and rearm for the next go-around.
"war - the tool of the low species like ants - proof for lack of intelligence."
Here is where I ask what you are recommending then? The (highly intelligent, but often lacking in wisdom) West is faced with an implacable foe in jihadists right now. Please apply not only your intelligence but your WISDOM in coming up with an alternative to war with Islamic Fundamentalists. Whole nations would be grateful for a way out of conflict with jihadists, be they both of low or high intelligence: wars seem to involve both with impunity.
One can do as nemo does, and stick your head in the sand ( the rest to soon follow). I, for one, am ashamed of his words. He speaks as a member of Hezbollah would. Or AQ.
One can pontificate from on high about one's intelligence, and sneer at those below for their inability to avoid wars. So now is the time to save nations from this ugly spectre of war by telling us all what to do in sufficient practical and detailed terms that war and conflict can be stopped. I am sure that all parties would immediately respond to this wise direction appropriately.
Otherwise, you are weeping and wailing and knashing your teeth for naught. One-sided rants against war won't do, you see: there is the other side to take into account.
"you know how to "measure" intelligence? By the range of time an intelligence can oversee. Because intelligence is the conquest of the future, the higher the intelligence, the farer you can extrapolate current actions into the future..."
Look out to the latter half of this century, and the resulting demography of Europe as projected. Then apply your intelligence to the projection that Europe will have a majority of Muslims then, 2050-2100, because of the combination of lower-than-replace-level birthrate of Europeans and the far higher, growth-rate and immigration rate of Muslims. If Turkey were to be admitted to the EU, the rate of immigration would overwhelm Europe sooner.
Please don't take my word for this (obviously you won't anyway), do your own research on the projections. Then ask what this majority of Muslims will do then?
They have already done exactly this (impose sharia law)in Malmo, and tried to do it in Canada recently.
The rest then follows in due time: dhimmitude! Then what?
A small addendum: A group doesn't have to have even as much as a majority to upset the current government and impose another form of rule.
Even more blatantly propagandistic, willfully duplicitous, and fraudulently one-sided than the ravings of our own [US] NeoConNazi Reich! Reviewing these highly "selective" excerpts alone, one would *think* Israel's Olmert Regime was conducting little more than a "peacekeeping" mission in Lenabon, instead of the full-blown, genocidal massacre of civilians and total demolition of Lebanese infrastructure, homes, and businesses. ==== And Hezbollah's *retaliatory* strikes against this vicious blitzkrieg of "collective punishment"? Why, those are virtually ALL that's reported here, as if *they* were the CAUSE of this pre-meditated Zionist carnage. Meanwhile the Israeli government's own unmistakable terrorism is dubbed -- in grand Orwellian style -- "COUNTER-terrorism"!: The Israeli Government's Official Website, by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs [Disgusting! Absolutely disgusting.].
"... In the end, against Islamic fundamentalists there is only one way out: kill or be killed. Reason has scant chance of deflecting, even temporarily, their push to dominance. ..." ==== WOW! Just as I indicated, and now boldly *repeated* (in full fidelity with Goebbels' methods) to foster the illusion of "verity". Interestingly, I would have employed quite similar words -- with FAR more basis -- to describe the current breed of belligerent right-wing fanatics in *this* country, among whom our zealous, "pre-emptive" Klansman so obviously counts himself. ==== Of course, no one here was acually TALKING about "Islamic fundamentalists" (other than MaNNNing). I believe the topic had in fact shifted toward a frank discussion of *Israel's* brutally genocidal assaults against the *whole* of Lebanon, principally targeting innocent civilians and infrastructure rather than focusing in any discernible way on actual Hezbollah militia. That being the case, wouldn't the identical "logic" necessarily apply equally to the "Zionist fundamentalists"? Isn't it every bit as appropriate for those currently being savaged by the wildly indiscriminate attacks of the IDF to *also* conclude that the only "solution" is to "kill or be kiled"?? ==== "... The (highly intelligent, but often lacking in wisdom) West is faced with an implacable foe in jihadists right now. ..." ==== More hollow demagoguery. Along with being an utterly unabashed, blatant racist, you seem to exhibit little more than a "comic book" mentality. I'm aware that you're ostensibly a "senior citizen", but THAT ridiculously melodramatic assertion -- along with its unfounded insinuation of supposed "Western" intellectual superiority (which you yourself *consistently* undermine) -- clearly indicates that senility may have regressed you to the approximate maturity of a fourteen-year old. Your obsession with simplistic, "black and white" notions and absolutist hyperbole is truly astounding!
Of course, no one here was acually TALKING about "Islamic fundamentalists" (other than MaNNNing). I believe the topic had in fact shifted toward a frank discussion of *Israel's* brutally genocidal assaults against the *whole* of Lebanon, principally targeting innocent civilians and infrastructure rather than focusing in any discernible way on actual Hezbollah militia.
Indeed! One-sided argumentation is your specialty, it is clear, Mr AQ.. It takes the aggression of an unbrideled jihadist deed to provoke retaliation by Israel and the will for them to win. It is also true that there is no such thing as proportionate response in war, especially when your nation is threatened with annihilation.
You are a Jew-hater, it is also clear. In your mind, Israel can do nothing right, and Hezbollah gets a free pass, as does Hamas and AQ, right nemo? Show your true colors here and admit your direct support for jihadists. You have all but done so in your last posts, so be a man and admit it here in writing.
along with its unfounded insinuation of supposed "Western" intellectual superiority..
Now the man can't read at all. I made no claims for Western intellectual superiority, merely that some Westerners that CLAIM intellectual superiority should use that gift to tell us all what needs to be done to stop jihadists, and hence the current conflict. Of course, that cannot include you, nemo, as you can't read well enough.
An excellent rebuttal to the fallacious NeoConNazi "talking points" developed as would-be "justification" for Israel's rampant atrocities against Lebanon: Five Myths That Sanction Israel's War Crimes, by Jonathan Cook ==== This week I had the pleasure to appear on American radio, on the Laura Ingraham show, pitted against David Horowitz, a "Semite supremacist" who most recently made his name under the banner of Campus Watch, leading McCarthyite witch-hunts against American professors who have the impertinence to suggest that maybe, just maybe, Arabs have minds and feelings like the rest of us. ==== It was a revealing experience, at least for a British journalist rarely exposed to the depths of ignorance and prejudice in the United States on Middle East matters -- well, apart from the regular wackos who fill my email inbox. But five minutes of listening to Horowitz speak, and the sympathy with which his arguments were greeted by Laura ("The Professors -- your book's a great read, David"), left me a lot more frightened about the world�s future. ==== Horowitz's response to every question, every development in the Middle East, whether it concerns Lebanon, the Palestinians, Syria, or Iran, is the same: "They want to drive the Jews into the sea." It's as simple as that. Not even a superficial attempt at analysis; just the message that the Arab world is trying to finish off the genocide started by Europe. And if Laura is any yardstick, a lot of Americans buy that stuff. ==== Horowitz is keen to bang the square peg of the Lebanon story into the round hole of his claims that the "Jews" are facing an imminent genocide in the Middle East. And to help him, he and the massed ranks of US apologists for Israel -- regulars, I suspect, of shows like Laura's -- are promoting at least four myths regarding Hezbollah's current rockets strikes on Israel. Unless they are challenged at every turn, the danger is that they will win the ground war against common sense in the US ... ==== [Alas, some Americans -- need I name names? -- were clearly "casualties" of that particular war LONG ago.]
Mr. Cook is setting up strawmen myths that do not matter one whit in the Israel-Hezbollah battles. What matters is stopping Hezbollah from comtinuous, unprovoked crimes against Israelis.
Since Hezbollah is all-pervasive in Lebanon and a member of the government, it is responsible for the criminal actions of its members against Israel, especially the kidnapping of Israels soldiers.
In this sense, Lebanon has called down on itself the reaction of the Israelis, who are sick and tired of these year after year terrorist attacks. Once and for all, they are saying, let us diminish Hezbollah, so that our people can live in peace with friendly Lebanese.
Now the conflict has escalated on BOTH sides, and it may well broaden further. Who started it, and who shot John is really irrelevant now. What IS relevant is the armed Hezbollah terrorists who will not live in peace with Israel, and do not want the new Lebanon government to succeed.
mannning
ostrich feathers
this wording is used when one doesn't want to see things, not simply doesn't want to believe the same
those people are called "heretics"...
In the end, against Islamic fundamentalists there is only one way out: kill or be killed
no,no, dear - the choice is not kill or be killed - but kill, and be killed. You should study your bible about the sword-thing. The Endloesung doesn't work and it didn't work not just "because it wasn't severe enough," daddy-twin
Here is where I ask what you are recommending then?
oh, there is a whole scientific branch called De-escalation, not only useful for teams in companies or families...
Please don't take my word for this (obviously you won't anyway), do your own research on that...
Whole nations would be grateful for a way out of conflict with jihadists,
oh, yes, like God's Burner Bush or Europe's defender Putin?
Please apply not only your intelligence but your WISDOM
WISDOM = the intelligence to think for more than yourself, to protect the group - for more than just the next moment
how do you define wisdom?
Look out to the latter half of this century, and the resulting demography of Europe as projected. Then apply your intelligence to the projection that Europe will have a majority of Muslims then, 2050-2100,
Please apply not only your intelligence, but... - then apply your intelligence...
thank you for the compliment - so i have some intelligence, that's great and if i listen to you and learn from you, then maybe some time in the future i will even be able to use my intelligence
very kind of you, thanks, daddy-twin ;-)
but regarding "projection...2050-2100"
so you don't know the Pentagon Report, thanks for the answer
Why, you are right, of course, it is kill and be killed in some proportion, not one to one, however. Hez is being taken down now, and there will be no crash cease fire to save them. Worse, there seems to be no nation in the West that will pony up troops to go into Lebanon and set up an armed border guard. Not without having Hezbollah disarmed first! Germany's condition. Thus Israel will have the time to clean out Southern Lebanon and hold it for some time.
If Hez hits Tel Aviv, it is a major escallation. That might result in the Israelis going for all of Lebanon, and shooting every man they think is or was a terrorist HB.
You take great store in Pentagon Reports? Especially on Climate Change?
On any good day, I can get you a negative report, a positive report, and a middling report, all backed up by supposedly top drawer scientists who have personally tagged the glaciers and iceburgs. Who to believe is the real question.
"... Who to believe is the real question." ==== Considering that you exclusively choose to "believe" only those who reinforce your utterly preconceived notions -- e.g., right-wing political hacks like Robert Spencer -- and exhibit NO clearly discernible critical thinking skills, your dilemma is *quite* understandable. But for the rest of us, REALITY imposes no such formidable obstacles to recognition . (Alas, I suppose we can also take comfort in knowing assuredly whom NOT to believe ... MaNNNing.) ==== Incidentally, I strongly suspect that the vast majority of your detractors 'don't take YOUR word for it' for the very simple reason that they've *already" done their own research -- in spades! -- and have found yours to be appallingly lacking in *any* objective criteria. Most of us are instantly agape at your astounding displays of "pride of ignorance". Sorry, chum, but your "word" has been widely recognized as an utterly worthless commodity in any *information* exchange. (Why do you think NO ONE responds to your deluded ravings at "Right Words" blog? For a "battle of wits", you've shown up notoriously ill-equipped!)
"Mr. Cook is setting up strawmen myths ... ==== By all means, please elaborate fully on the precise nature of the alleged "straw men". I see NO such arbitrary contrivances employed in that essay, only a commendably lucid analysis of several propaganda falsehoods being widely, uncritically disseminated by the pro-Zionist media. Do you know what a "straw man argument" *is*, MaNNNing?? (Seemingly not.) And what exactly is the supposed meaning of the phrase, "strawman MYTH"?? Do you reject the FACTS related in Cook's piece, which reveals how Pro-Israel spokespersons are deliberately attempting to revise history and distort current realities for their own purposes? If so, I don't see a BASIS for any such vacuous denial on your part. As for "terrorist attacks", it's clear that *Israel* initiated those, on a monstrous scale! No nation that would engage its military in widespread slaughter of civilians and the total devastation of infrastructure -- as would-be "retaliation" for a strictly *military* assault -- can remotely consider itself "civilized". The Israeli government is doggedly (and boldly hypocritically) emulating the very collective punishment "reprisal" tactics of the Third Reich itself! (Of course, you may consider that a "good thing". But I certainly do NOT! Such deliberate, state-sponsored terrorism is the height of barbarity.)
His worshipfulness says..."it is the Islamic fundamentalists goal to destroy the West and create a new Caliphate that rules under Islamic law. "
I wonder, why is it bad for 'islamists' to desire to form a caliphate in their own region of the world yet on your own blog on 15July06 we find you writing this:
Defend and protect the US against:
: further secularization of the government-Accept.
: further attempts to denude religious symbols and prayers-Accept
: secular humanism and World Government encroachment-Accept.
Seems a littly hypocritical to me my dear friend. You are publicly a conservative christian, nowadays this is code for SBC membership south of the Mason-Dixon line and other evangelical denominations elsewhere. Our nation was founded on secular ideology period. It does not matter how many times you repeat the lie. The United States of America IS NOT officially a Christian state. There is a reason that Disestablishment was included in the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. There is a reason that the Supreme Court has repeatedly remarked at the First Amendment being first due to the primacy of its utility in observing the fudnamental human rights that are core to our nation's ideology. You sir, cannot have it both ways. You know it and I know it.
These are the degenerate butchers whose barbaric acts MaNNNing considers not only "defensible", but worthy of support!: UN Attack Looks Deliberate [Agence France-Presse] ==== UN Secretary General Kofi Annan today said he was "shocked" at Israel's "apparently deliberate targeting" of a UN post in Lebanon, in which up to four UN observers were killed. ==== Mr Annan described the strike as a "co-ordinated artillery and aerial attack on a long established and clearly marked UN post." ==== He said it took place "despite personal assurances given to me by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that UN positions would be spared Israeli fire." ==== "Furthermore, General Alain Pelligrini, the UN Force Commander in south Lebanon, had been in repeated contact with Israeli officers throughout the day on Tuesday, stressing the need to protect that particular UN position from attack. ... [Read on for further details; two additional reports follow.] ==== Of course, that's NeoConNazi "integrity" for you. Remember the USS Liberty? Stunningly similar example of official Israeli treachery, described in virtually identical terms: The Assault on the USS Liberty Still Covered Up After 26 Years, by James M. Ennes Jr. [Washington Report; June 1993] ==== Twenty-six years have passed since that clear day on June 8, 1967 when Israel attacked the USS Liberty with aircraft and torpedo boats, killing 34 young men and wounding 171. The attack in international waters followed over nine hours of close surveillance. Israeli pilots circled the ship at low level 13 times on eight different occasions before attacking. Radio operators in Spain, Lebanon, Germany and aboard the ship itself all heard the pilots reporting to their headquarters that this was an American ship. They attacked anyway. And when the ship failed to sink, the Israeli government concocted an elaborate story to cover the crime. ==== There is no question that this attack on a U.S. Navy ship was deliberate. This was a coordinated effort involving air, sea, headquarters and commando forces attacking over a long period. It was not the "few rounds of misdirected fire" that Israel would have the world believe. Worse, the Israeli excuse is a gross and detailed fabrication that disagrees entirely with the eyewitness recollections of survivors. Key American leaders call the attack deliberate. More important, eyewitness participants from the Israeli side have told survivors that they knew they were attacking an American ship. ... [Even the same utterly duplicitous Israeli M.O. was manifested in both incidents.]
wonder, why is it bad for 'islamists' to desire to form a caliphate in their own region of the world
The Caliphate they desire, Sir, is not simply within Islamic nations, but rather in the entire world.
Our nation was founded on secular ideology period.
Simply not true. The only provision in the Amendment is to prohibit the establishment of a national church, not to prohibit religions per se...It was merely in a letter by JEFFERSON that the phrase "separation of church and state" was written.
Progressive Judges, liberals, humanists, atheists, and the ACLU have pushed for full secularization and the denuding of religious symbols from public spaces. The restructuring of the Supreme Court and lower courts will contribute substantially to the correction of this evil, nihilistic trend.
This anti-Christian, anti-American effort is what I will resist. The conflict is really between Christian and atheist philosophies, which is gradually being realized by the Christian majority. The insidious and underhanded manner in which these attacks on religion have been conducted are reprehensible, and this nihilism will be repulsed.
again: When one holds beliefs that are shown daily to be at odds with reality, ending the seeing of contrary data to preserve one's sanity is clearly what an ostrich does...:), and some others as well, of course.
Jason: Well said above. Our rabid Klansman seems to have no problem speaking out of *both* sides of his mouth simultaneously. He also consistently blurts the fictitious belief that "Islam is a warrior religion" -- to use his own words -- while appearing fully dedicated, on a personal level, to the proposition of "lying, cheating, stealing and killing" the FIDELS of the world (to use Spencer's words, which he wielded previously without attribution.). A nominal Christian who extolls the "virtues" of a fanatically homicidal, militaristic stance -- meanwhile denigrating the religion of *others* as allegedly "warlike" -- is truly a ponderous profile in hypocrisy. ==== Again: Bouncing off your own apt biblical reference above, I typically envision MaNNNing as a frenzied yokel out in his back yard, furiously "pounding plowshares into swords". A more demented "follower of Christ" I have never encountered!
"... When one holds beliefs that are shown daily to be at odds with reality, ending the seeing of contrary data to preserve one's sanity is clearly what an ostrich does...:)" ==== The supreme irony of contemplating the notion that Mannning may in fact intend this perfectly *autobiographical* statement as a slam at *others* is enough to induce near-fatal apoplectic fits. (At first, I thought it was a confession!) :-)
"The Caliphate they desire, Sir, is not simply within Islamic nations, but rather in the entire world." === Sir: Do you have any reliable *polling data* to support this ridiculous contention? (I would just "take your word", but omniscience regarding the global mindset of the world's Muslims seems a wee bit "out of your league".) Moreover, is your "objection" based solely on the obstacles that would impose to the establishment of a global US "Caliphate"?
mannning
A small addendum
i wrote about
Who to believe is the real question.
it's ok, i do understand you. My mother also doesn't care about Global warming...
but it's not a question of faith. Faith is for followers, leaders try to avoid to depend on pure believings, as you know - it is simply a question of the (significant and growing) probability of losing/costing real money why the Pentagon and Insurances are worried....
nemo: The Qur'an itself is the best authority. (28:50) is one example.
As to the warrior nature of Islam, here again is the reference provided earlier, and a new one:
http://answering-islam.org.uk/Quran/Themes/jihad_passages.html
http://www.interesting-information.com/islam/jihad.htm
Of course, you don't read them, and if you do, you suddenly find all manner of objections to them that don't exist, so why I bother I don't know.
It seems that many, many scholars around the world are issuing warnings about the nature and intentions of Islam. I can give you at least 40 references with only a cursory googling. But it isn't needed for an ostrich anyway. read your own tea leaves.
again: Not care about GW? Whoever said that? Regardless of the origin of the temperature rise, it is the magnitude and duration of the rise itself that is vitally important to mankind.
The only conflict I have is with blatant attempts to harness the US with treaty restrictions it cannot meet and would spend itself into total bankrupcy trying. The rest of the nations either have no restrictions (China and Russia, especially)or who cannot even meet their modest goals now (with the possible exception of the UK). This cynical effort was rejected by the US quite rightly, in favor of other methods of reducing pollution economically.
There is serious disagreement within our scientific community as to the magnitude of the man-made contribution to greenhouse gases, and the small effect that even a large reduction of man-made gases would have in the next 50 years.
However, it is a great horse to ride when looking for funds to continue playing junior scientist, or senior fraud (think Al Gore), and it is certainly as fashionable in the community as was the existence of the ether.
Better science, far better science, will prevail, soon enough, I hope, to make some of these scientific charlatans back off.:) Perhaps when Norway freezes over...
And once again the CRUCIAL question goes completely unanswered, as MaNNNing "slyly" shuffles off to the presumed refuge of his typical, bait-and-switch, digressive style of monologue that neither supports his original contention nor even *addresses* the issue in any pertinent manner. ==== Let me repeat: "Sir: Do you have any reliable *polling data* to support this ridiculous contention?" Your remarkably dubious sources on the "teachings" of the Quran are totally *irrelevant* here! If you cannot produce reputable *polling* results, your allegation of what "they desire" is clearly a wishful fabrication -- i.e., unmitigated HORSESHIT. The Quran no more serves as an indicator of worldwide Muslim "public opinion" than does your own Bible flawlessly depict the behavior and thinking of alleged "Christians", as you yourself so clearly demonstrate! ==== So, WHERE'S THE BEEF?
"... or senior fraud (think Al Gore) ... ==== Oh, you're making this MUCH too easy, Mannning. Whenever *I* think "senior fraud", it's YOUR name that instantly comes to mind! ==== Incidentally, how's that elaboration on Cook's alleged "straw myths" coming along? Planning to "dazzle" me anytime soon with a genuinely *compelling* argument? (NO?? Well, how about just a plausible one, then?) ;-)
Sorry nemo, your attempt to avoid the truth is comical. That somene would take such flaming positions is the very best indication of a deluded mind. You condemn yourself. You see, the daily news about Hezbollah alone makes my point perfectly!
Shall we look at Hamas, AQ, Iraq, Iran, Syria, the Phillipines, or the Indonesian Muslims too? Plus, it is obvious that the more moderate Muslim communities will not and can not control their brothers in the fighting, else they would be accused of violating their faith, and as a result being killed.
Your stand defies reality.
Ostrich!
mannning:
Perhaps when Norway freezes over...
yes, that's why Norway accepts the "treaty restrictions it cannot meet and would spend itself into total bankrupcy trying."
"Desert areas face increasing windstorms, while agricultural areas suffer from soil loss due to higher wind speeds and reduced soil moisture. The change toward a drier climate is especially pronounced in the southern states."
seems as if the Norwegian people simply are more valuable - in Dollars and Cents - than Americans of the Southern States....
btw: aren't those the Americans voting for (the) Bush(s)?
Obviously, the warming trend is affecting global climates to some degree, but you of all people should be leery of trend projections that have too few data points and many local variations. There in fact was a prediction that Norway may face a serious cooling trend soon, quite to the contrary of the fashionable idea of warming. I await better science to pinpoint the root cause of warming.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,12374,1083419,00.html
Why, again, 52% of Americans voted for Bush. Just about all but a few NE states and California, the Left Coast.
If you are implying that "Global Warming" has been caused by Bush,or by the South that voted for him, you are most certainly wrong. :) This implication is similar to the inane accusation that Bush caused the Katrina hurricane. Some people will go to extrodinary lengths to find something to blame Bush for! The fact is that had either Gore or Kerry won their election we would still have had Katrina and "Global Warming", a set of natural events remotely and narrowly related to man's activities. Might just as well blame Kofi Annan; in fact he was at the executive top of the world, the UN circus, during these events.
Sorry nemo, your attempt to avoid the truth is comical. ... ==== {SNORT} Funny!!! Especially since it's YOU who's consistently dodging each and every key question raised, meanwhile shuffling off to Buffallo with extraneous, purely anecotal BULLSHIT. It's obvious -- despite your pompous diatribes and spineless evasiveness -- that you CAN'T substantiate your preposterous claims in *any* meaningful way -- typical for such blatantly racist screed. But you're too much of a WEASEL to even admit that! (Are all Klan types so astoundingly craven??) ==== Incidentally, Ayman al Zawahiri just spoke out angrily -- quite appropriately, I'd say -- against Israel's US-approved massacres in Lebanon and Palestine.And strangely -- contrary to your own ludicrous claims -- HE seems to be seeking, at best, "a restoration of religion from Spain to Iraq" (traditional Muslim lands). That's hardly any aspiration for a GLOBAL "Caliphate", and he's touted as al Qaeda's #2 man! Even "AQ" itself, it seems, doesn't covet what YOU and your rabid right-wing windbags would attribute to the *entirety* of the Muslim world!: Bin Laden's deputy calls for global war on 'crusaders'. ==== Frankly, MaNNNing, you *reek* of NeoConNazi BUllSHit. And Dances with Wolves was correct -- You are clearly "NOT worth talking to." Consider yourself the recipient of a "three-fingered salute" with the outside two retracted. Hope you set *yourself* on fire during the next "cross burning"! (Send me a picture if you do.)
Condemned out of your own writing!
You start with the premise that Israel is wrong to defend itself, ,and end up proving to your satisfaction that Isreal is wrong. How very dishonest you are, nemo.
I suspect you of being Muslim, and attempting to suppress the real intentions of Islam with your improper interpretations of Islamic documents, or simply not reading the many I have referenced: dishonest in the extreme.
You do not dictate to me in any way, particularly on what is "key", as perhaps you realize now. Since you have failed the first step, that of reading all of the references I furnished twice now(ALL OF THEM!), there is nothing more to say on this subject to you.
If you are implying that "Global Warming" has been caused by Bush,or by the South that voted for him ... ==== Cut the crap, jackass!!! Again's implication was *crystal* clear; it's your own bogus "inferences " that are totally assinine!!! But then, I'm sure you're *well* aware of that, since you deliberately employ that ruse of postulating utterly phony "misconceptions" on a *regular* basis, presumably to thwart any meaningful *discussion* that might serve to undermine your relentless, vacuous pontifications.You, MaNNNing, are a scurrilous shyster, a hopelessly *artless* dodger, and a FRAUD! And judging by your *astoundingly* sophomoric assertion that observed regional cooling trends are somehow "at odds with" the symptoms of Global Warming -- by which you've demonstrated your abysmal ignorance on the topic -- you're also clearly a FOOL!!! ==== "It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt." ~ Mark Twain
... I suspect you of being Muslim, and attempting to suppress the real intentions of Islam ... ==== If that's your idea of a "smear", Bedsheet Boy, I'm genuinely flattered! Especially compared to your own antithetical concepts of "Christianity", Islam seems a remarkably *refreshing* alternative. Allahu akbar ! ==== HEY, while you're at it, why not fling some "Communist" mud, too -- "little red star cap", and all that?? There's a good little Nazi -- the Fuehrer would be SO proud of you! :-)
"Since you have failed the first step, that of reading all of the references I furnished twice now(ALL OF THEM!), there is nothing more to say on this subject to you." ==== Well, "Yoda": Since you've neither cited nor CONSULTED anything that remotely resembles a *legitimate* reference on this subject, you have absolutely nothing worthwhile to SAY!! I don't read utter GARBAGE just because some right-wing lunatic or hate-crime advocate like yourself facetiously dubs it "reference". And EVERY source you've cited on this topic has been just that! ==== It's YOU who don't dictate to me, Little Man, insofar as what constitutes valid "reference". The gutter scribblings you characteristically point to may "pass muster" with your Klan buddies, but they don't hold water with those of us who have actual *standards*. (Incidentally, that incoherent, inept stab at "false indignation" as a disinfo ploy is Sidestep #4 on your part. Found that POLLING DATA yet?? "STRAW MYTHS"??)
25 Guidelines for Understanding MaNNNing's Style of "Debate" [Among others, #7 features prominently above.]
Again,
As per our private conversation, yes this is a very textbook case for cognitive dissonance theory. What we find here with our friend Mannning is an utter lack of ability to even comprehend any sort of error in his judgement or his lack of ability to produce evidence to back his positions on any of his accusations. You see, to validate his past actions in engaging in a violent military action against the Communist movement in Korea, he was forced to convince himself that what he was doing was noble; and in fact, the spirit of Communism was antithesis to the higher ideals of Democracy espoused by his American leaders. In this heterophenomenological world he is king of his own destiny; there is no compatibility issues between capitalism and democratic society; and the 'evil' communists are trying to invade the world from China via their closest neighbor. It does not matter if popular history concurs with this point of view or disagrees with it. When a subject is faced with information that conflicts with his heterophenomenological worldview he is faced with a decision that does not necessarily bubble up to the surface of the subject's consciousness. At this point, the individual must decide whether the conflicting information can be rationalized into the fiction of his personal worldview or if it must be rejected and ignored. Of course, ignoring the new information is the preferred method; but sometimes the evidence is too strong or too pervasive to ignore. At this point, the subject must decide whether to embrace the new information and adjust his worldview to include it or consider the new information an abberation or a conspiracy by opposing forces. This decision is greatly influenced by the social structure of the subject's environment. People, of course, tend to surround themselves with like minded persons. This is no accident. It helps preserve the continuity of their heterophenomenological world and insulates the person from too many conflicting opinions. If this support network is a strong one, the individual can more readily resist the new information and continue believing what was previously believed. If not, the subject s usually forced to accept the new position as valid and suffer the humiliation of rethinking his position.
Mannning, I have never hated you for you misguided ideology. I have suffered trying to figure you out. The romantic inside me forces me to study you like the social caveman you are. You should understand that the only reason anyone in this environment tolerates your rants is in an effort to understand your kind. Your brand of Authoritarian Conservatism is damaging to the very existence of the state you claim to love so dearly. It is truly unfortunate that you cannot see yourself through others' eyes. But alas, you are at the end of a dying breed; and it is of great comfort to myself and others that we have confidence in our ability to hold on until you go. You see, like it or not, I am almost two full generations behind you in years. I belong to a generation that is just now coming into our own as a political power, while yours is fading away. We are your political future and there is nothing you can do about it. You can slander me, or Nemo, or Again, or anyone else you choose. Go ahead, I'm pretty thick skinned when it comes down to it. YOu have called me the equivolent of stupid, arrogant, insane, vulgar. You have used terms such as philosopher king, iconoclast, communist, brick, and pipsqueak, None of this matters because behind my words lie truths that you cannot face and an optimism that you cannot break. Feel free to keep speaking old man, but remember that while you are, you are doing so under a microscope and your silly drivel is falling on deaf ears.
mannning
There in fact was a prediction that Norway may face a serious cooling trend soon
<grin> oh, yes, that's really hard to understand for Joe Sixpack, so eagerly buying the China made products of Walmart while looking for a new job...
btw: Walmart, long ago loudly trumpeting that they would teach Old Europe how to sell things...
is leaving Old Europe now <griiin>...
it's simply not enough to believe to be the best ;-)
but regarding the link: please use html-tags, because others can't "pretend" to delete your post to see the whole link
btw - thanks, great article, but forgive my - your statement
I await better science to pinpoint the root cause of warming.
doesn't fit with your link: Look at "many of the outcomes of which we cannot predict."
it's not about the "root cause", but only about the unforeseeability of the results (actually the "destruction of information": action without repeatability and identifiability aka losing control)...
so thanks for the link - stored! And FYI: Atlantic currents show signs of weakening (only for subscribers) or Propagation of salinity anomalies from the North Atlantic
jasonj
YOu have called me the equivolent of stupid, arrogant, insane, vulgar. You can slander me, or Nemo, or Again, or anyone else you choose. Go ahead, I'm pretty thick skinned when it comes down to it.
yes, it takes two to tango
as long as someone can't hit you with his keybord or get the CIA to "liberate" you - it's your decision to accept or reject an offense...
wasn't that the "moral" of Michael Fox in Back to the future III?
you really should write your book, but please be aware that it isn't that easy as it may sound - at least as long as you don't write P-hantasy like poets, politicians or propagandists ;-)
(btw: thanks for the Twain-quote, nemo! I love that kind of "Tacuisses philosophicus fuisses"-quotes)
Again: Additional bad news in response to the arguably disingenuous question, "Whom to believe?", from the always conspicuosly conservative AP. Doesn't sound like there's any "room for doubt" to me, when people are actually *dying* as a direct result of this trend: Better Get Used to Killer Heat Waves. ==== [Of couse, I'm sure some individuals will ALWAYS express "doubts" about the reality of a development that so clearly illustrates the Wrong-headedness and inexcusably *backWards* policies of their preferred "Fuehrer".] ;-)
Yes, again, the Walmart retreat from Germany was announced here too, along with their intentions to increase their outlets in China from some 40 or so to 400, and in Latin America, using their proceeds from the sale of stores to finance the growth in what seems to them to be a far better market for cheap goods.:)
Perhaps they are right: they have been losing money in Germany for years, I suspect because of quality problems with their shoddy goods. We don't shop in Walmart for that reason.
Thank you for the links.
jasonj: Have you ever heard of overanalysis in psychiatry? That is a sin usually committed by amateurs, which you patently are.
Despite the rants and raves of progressives this year, I am confident that the GOP and the Conservatives will hold Congress in November, and will hold the Presidency in 2008.
Thus the "Authoritarian" Conservatives as you call them will increase their hegenomy in US government. Your two generations behind may well have to wait two more generations to approach anything like real political power, if ever.
This is simply because the new, far-left Democratic Party is not trusted by the majority of citizens with the security of the US, and probably never will be, so long as it is so very radicalized.
There are also deep and divisive issues with the positions of the majority versus the left on gay marriage, abortion, the death penalty, the obstructionist mentality of the Democrats, the silly blockages of court appointments, the flouting of the Constitution through legislatiion by leftist judges, the thrusts to take Christianity out of public view, and their complete lack of any concrete proposals of any sort on any topic at all. What is heard is: "we have a plan." Of course, the plan is never, never laid out in any detail.
Oh, you are all for these issues in private, but you say you are against them in public just to win votes. It is ludicrous to hear Demos spouting faith words now, cynically trying to woo the religious vote!
What I have seen written by you so far is bleats from the far left fringes of US thought, which could well be driven by envy, the usual sickness of fringe people.
Talking about cognitive dissonance!
mannning
Thank you for the links.
my pleasure
there are far more - the only hope for the Northern Hemisphere is, that the bottom of the Atlantic has changed significantly since the last known disappearance of the Gulf Stream. But actually, regarding friction, i fear, this will just increase disorder, won't help the informative processes we need so urgently
nemo
Better Get Used to Killer Heat Waves.
yes, the people start to strengthen their houses to withstand coming disasters - without knowing (most of them) that the insurances stop paying for some regions...
I'm sure some individuals will ALWAYS express "doubts" about the reality of a development that so clearly illustrates the Wrong-headedness and inexcusably *backWards* policies of their preferred "Fuehrer"
the banana-heap, you know - as long as the fuehrer occupies the store/bananas the chimps 'kiss his ass' to get some cheap fruits without efforts...
you know, chimps don't care much about others - and chimps have neither language/analytic minds nor pride
just hunger and instincts...
poor chimps - they don't understand that the fuehrers act like good poker players - first they let you win then you start to lose forever...
btw: thanks for the link - the "cooling centers" remind me of the ancient cities, build without electricity but able to stay cool just because of architecture...
ever visited the Alhambra?
Thanks Jimmy, you make my point famously. Interestingly, you morons hav taken the argument so far to the right, Goldwater himself would now be considered a commie.
Like I said old man, just keep talking. All that excess wind is keeping your petri dish warm.
Again: the link here may be of interest to you for passive cooling in hot climates. The Alhambra was remarkably cool, I remember, and very beautiful.
http://www.azsolarcenter.com/technology/pas-3.html
Jason: Regarding the tag, "Authoritarian" Conservatives, I would suggest that John Dean's analysis of the widespread Republican degeneration actually necessitates a slight revision to that -- viz., Authoritarian "Conservatives". As Dean clearly indicates (and as fanatics like MaNNNing amply illustrate), there is nothing REMOTELY "Conservative" (nor "conservative"), in any traditional sense of the word, in what is more accurately a proto-Totalitarian ideology embraced by these merely nominal "Conservatives", who nevertheless cling tenaciously to the inappropriate label as "window dressing". The insistence on continuing to use that defunct misnomer by most Republicans is clearly akin to a latter-day Nazi insisting he was nevertheless always a bona fide "Socialist": Triumph of the Authoritarians, by John W. Dean.
... ever visited the Alhambra? ==== Again: No, I've bever been to Spain, though I remember Deutschland quite fondly. But it's a fascinating history you've pointed to -- an exquisite example of 13th Century Islamic architecture, ever since repeatedly assaulted and defaced by would-be "civilized", Western powers. (Rather a *global* paradigm these days, I'd say.) ==== And here's a curiosity: I initially wondered about the somewhat peculiar title of John Dean's article above -- "Triumph", as applied to *Authoritarians* -- until I realized it might have been a subtle nod to Leni Riefenstal's magnum opus. Think so? (My very first reaction to the essay was that "Authoritarian", while vaguely appropriate, was an excedingly *kind* way to describe the current US Republikan [Theocratic / National Socialist] mindest. Maybe Dean did too, eh?) ;-)
mannning
The Alhambra was remarkably cool, I remember, and very beautiful.
remarkably cool - seems you live in a warm country (Virginia is that hot?). For people not used to such a heat, the Alhambra simply is a miracle of salvation ;-) - it's said that the cities of Ancient Arabia (Queen of Sheba et.al) were also able to stay cool
there is much to learn from the ancient cultures...
(link stored, btw, thanks)
MaNNNing: You really ENJOY pontificating cluelessly without any recourse to facts, don't you? I'll assume it's some sort of compensation mechanism for an embarrassing "personal" inadequacy. But the sheer folly of it is so amazingly conspicuous -- in the process, you make it *abundantly* clear that you hardly know your ass from a hole in the ground and possess all the "innate credibility" of a raving lunatic. :-) === "American fascism will not be really dangerous until there is a purposeful coalition among the cartelists, the deliberate poisoners of public information, and those who stand for the K.K.K. type of demagoguery." ~ Henry A. Wallace ==== [Ooops. Oh well, better start sounding the alarm *now*, Henry!] :-(
nemo
Again: No, I've bever been to Spain, though I remember Deutschland quite fondly.
you should have been in Germany during the World Cup - you would have loved it, i guess - something like 1954 and 1989 put together to give (re)birth a nation. Remember Seabiscuit? Than you know what i mean...
an exquisite example of 13th Century Islamic architecture
IMO the Alhambra is the most beautiful - just because i'm not a fan of the ornamental style and the beauty of the Alhambra is more about clear elegance of architecture (at least in my memory) ;-)
a subtle nod to Leni Riefenstal's magnum opus
yes, Triumph of the...
sounds too monstrous not to be intended...
"Authoritarian", while vaguely appropriate, was an excedingly *kind* way to describe the current US Republikan [Theocratic / National Socialist] mindest
"Authoritarian" - the "lovers of Leaders and Unquestioning Obedience" - yes, that's exactly the message of Riefenstahl: "adore, cheer, obey and never ask or think on your own" because power is only in the fuehrer
btw: i can't stand Riefenstahl - i hate that monumental style of megalomania - i hate it in the statues of Ramses III, in the statues of Lenin or the Nazis and everywhere where people try to avoid responsibleness by turning it over to "adorable authorities" - daddies, kings, popes, bosses, generals, all the "best and brightest" thinking for us and managing our lifes for us stupid nobodies
Again: For the next few days here it will be averaging 100 deg F at 3:00 pm, with a relatively high humidity and no wind. The combo makes it feel like 108 effectively. Not a time to run in a marathon.
You know, I really do feel sorry for people who cannot be honest in discourse, and cling to their personal "position" without reference to resources available to them, as nemo has done regarding Islam and Muslims.
What that means is that they are basically insecure, unhappy, frustrated, angry, driven by the next conspiracy that is invented and totally devious-minded when it comes to factual presentation. Rejection of references because you don't "like what they say" is dishonest in the extreme, and rejection of the authors for the same reason is likewise dishonest.
The Western World has been horrified by Islamic barbarism for centuries, and many of the West's intellectual elite have written extensively and vehemently against it, including Bertrand Russell, Winston Churchill, John Wesley, John Q. Adams, and on and on it goes. There are simply tons of scholarly written works on the evils of Islam, of which I referenced earlier only a smidgeon.
Religious criticism is both common and very well-established in literature. In the case of Islam, the remarkable thing is the great consistency of the many volumes of literature in having terrible adversions to the well-documented barbarisms Islam practices to this day, and in trying to warn us of the grave threat Islam poses to the West.
This seems to hold true even when the works are written by practicing Muslims, who take their lives in their hands to tell their stories, and to warn us of what is afoot (See the references.). We are further warned by ex-Muslims that a diabolical coverup of the true nature of Islam is underway around the world. Thus, those who consider Islam to be purely defensive and peaceful are either ignorant dupes or dedicated Muslim fanatics that are aiding the coverup. Which of these are you, nemo?
Author unimportant:
"You know, I really do feel sorry for people who cannot be honest in discourse, and cling to their personal "position" without reference to resources available to them, as nemo has done regarding Islam and Muslims.
What that means is that they are basically insecure, unhappy, frustrated, angry, driven by the next conspiracy that is invented and totally devious-minded when it comes to factual presentation. Rejection of references because you don't "like what they say" is dishonest in the extreme, and rejection of the authors for the same reason is likewise dishonest."
Gentlemen, you will of course notice the subtle or not so subtle tactic here. This technique is of course our guest's usual tactic of deflection. Nemo asked for reference sources for our guest's claims and was met with a statement claiming the Nemo was guilty of not providing references to his alegations. Once again, Mr. Farrar is quick to pull out the 'your a fanatic' card. This is a favorite with the present administration in our federal government as well. But of course, once again it is still just 'I know you are, but what am I?!' in a different wrapper.
Let's be serious Mr. Farrar. If you cannot come back with a better retort than that I truly see you slipping here. One could make the same accusation to every though you have pondered in this thread. In fact, I have yet to hear you make any kind of original statement as of yet. Now please do not construe this as a derogatory attack, I am merely trying to keep score here in as objective a manner as I can.
jasonj said: "...and was met with a statement claiming the Nemo was guilty of not providing references to his alegations (sic)."
Dear God, only you can show me such a statement I made! The fact is. I was excoriating nemo for not reading my references about Islamic jihad, long before he was yelling about my so-called lack of references. So I repeated and added to them, which I am virtually certain nemo never read, but most certainly criticized! This is therefore a totally farcical argument by both of these intellectually dishonest people. But it is just about par for the course for people that cannot and will not attempt to see the other side of the argument, will not read references, and are hence unworthy of further effort.
We will next hear the Ward Churchill theme: "Little Eichmans" from nemo.
Incidentally, no one here was willing to step up and give their wise advice as to what we, the US, should do in the world with our power and resources. No one has any ideas, is that so? If so, you lose the right to criticize what is happening from here on. The time for wisdom is before the events force us to action. on other's terms.
Again: Here's another one you may want to add to your files. These dramatic, *biotic* changes in the global marine environment are quite startling. I knew of some of these alarming developments long ago, but there's also much that's new to me. And the ramifications are frightening, to say the least: A Primeval Tide of Toxins [Los Angeles Times] ==== Runoff from modern life is feeding an explosion of primitive organisms. This "rise of slime," as one scientist calls it, is killing larger species and sickening people. ...
"You know, I really do feel sorry for people who cannot be honest in discourse, and cling to their personal "position" without reference to resources available to them, as nemo has done regarding Islam and Muslims. What that means is that they are basically insecure, unhappy, frustrated, angry, driven by the next conspiracy that is invented and totally devious-minded when it comes to factual presentation. ... ==== A truly laudable, magnificantly accurate, AUTO-biographical statement by our "artless dodger". Too bad it was so utterly wasted in an inept, misgusided attempt at *external* character assassination, rather than earnestly employed for the purpose of introspection. Were I to descend to an equally childish level, I'd simply spout "I'm rubber and you're glue ..." ==== You, MaNNNING are not only a shameless fraud, but an utterly hopeless Piece of Work! Those who, like yourself, would openly indulge in puerile exhibitions of clearly unfounded, mock "clairvoyance" and "precognition" obviously occupy the very pinnacle of Deluded Crackpottery! ==== And I repeat: Your allegedly "scholarly" references are GARBAGE -- sheer demagoguery based on nothing more than the author's highly opinionated say-so, in Spencer's case, and utterly irrelevant to your own preposterous claims in all the others. It's clear you wouldn't recognize a *legitimate* scholarly reference if it *bit* you, any more than you're capable of recognizing the highly diverse meanings of the word "jihad"! ==== Nevertheless, thank you for once again dramatically illustrating your immense ignorance and thereby thoroughly undermining your own notoriously scant "credibility" for all the world to see. :-) ==== "Out, out, brief candle! ['Tis] but a walking shadow, a poor player That struts and frets his hour upon the stage, And then is heard no more. It is a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing. " ~Shakespeare, "Macbeth"
I forgot to mention: I feel utterly compelled to don mental "hip-waders" EVERY time I read one of MaNNNing's noxious little diatribes. Once again, he obfuscates the existence of writings expressing anti-Islamic *opinion* with actual evidence supporting his patently absurd allegations of "fact". ==== I'm quite aware that there are writings sufficient to fill entire *libraries* -- a great many of them recognizably *commendably* scholarly and unerringly factual -- which accurately document the *multitude* of evils perpetrated by the "West" throughout history. But I wouldn't presume to introduce them as "evidence" to support any sweeping generalization that "the West and all its inhabitants are inherently evil"! MaNNNing, on the other hand (along with his preferred author), recognizes no such rational distinctions. As long as a source ostensibly "slams" Islam, he will introduce it fictitiously as "evidence supporting" his wildest flights of racist fantasy and the most preposterous of generalizations. Obviously, some people are utterly *incapable* of seeing the world in anything other than coarse, "black and white" terms and quite unable to distinguish what constitutes valid evidence for a specific allegation. ==== "The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them." ~Mark Twain
"Incidentally, no one here was willing to step up and give their wise advice as to what we, the US, should do in the world with our power and resources. No one has any ideas, is that so?"
How about a different approach? Current US foreign policy is the same as the old foreign policy with one exception. Now all gloves are off.
9/11 happened when the world "loved" the US. Now that the world hates the US, do you think things will get better?
Jason: Re your "Author Umimportant" post above, we obviously reached quite similar conclusions using only slightly different words. But I must say your pinpoint precision in squarely identifying that disingenuous ploy of MaNNNing's as a deliberate application of "deflection" was amazingly erudite. Bravo! ==== Incidentally, I've found *one* allegation of his that might actually be correct. But that is merely the suggestion that you may have "over-analyzed" him. Frankly, I've come to believe he's quite a *deliberate* fraud, whose only "ailment" is an utterly voluntary adoption of the Orwellian mindset of Doublethink. I believe he's fully aware of his deviousness; hence the constant resort to "bait and switch" tactics when the chips are seemingly down. I don't mean that as a "derogatory attack" either -- all that I've ever opined, regarding MaNNNing's essential "character" (with rare exceptions), has been empirically *obvious* to me.
"Incidentally, no one here was willing to step up and give their wise advice as to what we, the US, should do in the world with our power and resources. ... ==== For an individual who characteristically diplays such breathtaking unresponsiveness to a vast array of key questions and objections, you certainly exhibit uncommon *arrogance* in thus presuming to abruptly "redirect" the conversation! Who died and made you Webmaster, O MaNNNure Slinger?? ==== Frankly, I don't recall that question ever being *raised* previously, though for all the extraneous BUllSHit you consistently wrap your comments in, I'm sure I could easily have missed it. But I DO distinctly recall having asked you long ago about the peculiar, KKK-like spelling of your moniker -- a question which fell on seemingly deaf ears, though it was repeated *several* times! ==== When do *you* intend to "step up" and at least *attempt -- however vainly -- to substantiate your own ludicrous assertions of late? "Strawmen Myths"; "Warrior religion"; "Lie, cheat, steal and kill the Infidel"; "They want a global Caliphate" -- all of those and more you now utterly dismiss, as IF you'd somehow *proven* them, when in fact you've scarcely addressed them. Throwing out a link or two doesn't "prove" your point in the least! How *exactly* do ANY of those supposed references *directly* substantiate your own statements???
nemo: Thank you for giving me the reference to your catalog of debating techniques. I can and should label each of your declarative statements as to its proper classification in this scheme. But it is easy to do for yourself. Reminds me of the convention of joksters where one of them would yell J456! ....and the crowd would roar!
This tells me what you are on about; I could not descern any pattern in your writing beyond flame-lie-flame.
Or was it flame-lie-flame-lie? Now I have this excellent guide.
Doesn't matter, however, it will take the form of a full ad hominem attack before the close, as usual.
And the resident imposter 'responds', having never read a word. It must be nice being a "legend in your own mind", MaNNNing. But the rest of us are fully aware that you *are* a complete fraud.
Nemo can't read.
If things are as nemope says, I am in very excellent company being critical of Islam, such as Thomas Acquinas, Winston Churchill, Pascal, Voltaire, Bernard Lewis, and many more, as wiki shows in its incomplete list.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Critics_of_Islam
Why, it suddenly dawns on me that this argument is not about Islam at all as far as nemope is concerned. He simply is trying to flame me away, and never to show his faliure to understand the threat of Islam.
Even more dishonest polemics.
I don't flame away, as anyone from warblogging knows. The truth has a way of hitting one in the face sooner or later--perhaps with a sword.
mannning
Again: For the next few days here it will be averaging 100 deg F at 3:00 pm, with a relatively high humidity and no wind.
despite the fact, that August is usually hotter than July, it's fine now here...
nemo
A Primeval Tide of Toxins
yes, you know, Mother Nature's ways are "beyond our understanding" - and if she decides, that enough is enough, our alpha chimps will sit on their rotting banana heaps with all their bootlicking (male and female) "horse" and will be too stupid to understand that all their "power, nukes and dollars" are nothing worth in the face of physics...
but at least they can die in war, their beloved tool for everything, to destroy anything, to kill anybody, to be the "best"...
or at least...
to be "THE LAST MAN", the "the most contemptible thing", btw....
then we can write on the tombstone of humankind:
They never understood, but they could efficiently and effectively kill little girls and boys
SETI - if only we had searched for endo-terrestrian intelligence...
I believe he's fully aware
yes, Mr. mannning is very disciplined and well considered...
and he is able to make people stay on my page! Look at the sheer number of postings - it's not my "brilliance", it's just Mr. mannnings way of discussion which attracts people and convinces them to reply...
i guess, in his previous jobs he must have been very successful ;-)
Ho hum. Now Monsieur MaNNNure would deludely advise us that factuality derives from mere "consensus". Whatever scientific education you *actually* had, MM, it was obviously wasted. And sharing "common ground" with like-minded critics was never the issue! As usual, you're dissembling.
"Nemo can't read." ==== Funny! But alas, I read *you* loud and clear. You've YET to answer those crucial questions -- a notoriously spineless approach to "debate", if ever I saw one. Obviously, the "fraud" shoe fits you well.
"Mr. mannning is very disciplined and well considered...and he is able to make people stay on my page! Look at the sheer number of postings - it's not my "brilliance", it's just Mr. mannnings way of discussion which attracts people and convinces them to reply. ... ==== Again: Of course, there's always the problem of "quality versus quantity" to reckon with. Considering the usual merit of MaNNNing's blusterous "contributions", your Signal-to-Noise Ratio has unfortunately declined dramatically. (Of course, as I've always said, he is occasionaly good for "comic relief" via a rousing round of Whack-a-Troll.) ;-)
Ah! The usual brickbats from an intellectual midget, who can't see for himself what most of the West perceives about Islamic Fundamentalists. So be it; those who refuse to heed the warning signs and stick their heads in the sand will be in for a huge surprise downstream. There is no mercy in Jihadist hearts for adamant infidels.
(Infidel= One who does not believe in Islam)
If one accepts Islam to avoid being killed, what can one say about their integrity? It does not exist. Or, it never did exist.
All: I'm exceedingly curious. Does the following represent an indisputable example of Biblical "moral relativism"? Is it an unmistakable confirmation that ALL of the Abrahamic religions (including Christianity) are "warrior religions" under "appropriate" circumstances determined by strictly "situational norms"? Or are BOTH conclusions unerringly correct? Ecclesiastes 3:1-8 ==== To everything there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven: ... A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; ... A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war; and a time of peace.
nemo
I'm exceedingly curious. Does the following represent an indisputable example of Biblical "moral relativism"?
yes, indeed, now you mention it...
but i always here the music and so, actually, i guess, i can't resist to think the words are more thought to be comfort...
the power of music...
nemo
I'm exceedingly curious. Does the following represent an indisputable example of Biblical "moral relativism"?
This is an Old Testament Book and it illustrated the earlier morality of Christians.
One must search in the New Testament for more relevant moralities for today's congregations.
The book is recording the comments, morality and philosophy of a later King of Jerusalem, and advising youths to follow God, because nothing of riches, parties, things galore, or mighty achievements means anything without God in one's life.
The specific piece should be read as simply a summary of the times of life the King says the youths will most likely encounter as they proceed, written in a poetic manner, and directly from the factual past experiences of the King in his era, not any statement of deep philosophy whatsoever.
The author was thought by some to be Solomon, but certain references and characteristics of the writing have pegged it as written quite a bit later, perhaps 4 or 5 centuries, and using Solomon as a literary device.:)
Amazing erudition nemo. Were you perhaps researching a peice that was intended to illustrate the awful facts that Christianity is a warrior religion, and their morals were all relative? Hilarious!
References:
"The Holy Bible" (KJV),
"The One Volume Bible Commentary," Edited by Dummelow, New York, The Macmillan Company, 1958
"i can't resist to think the words are more thought to be comfort...the power of music..." ==== Oh, I think they decidedly *are* a comfort in many respects. But I personally agree *entirely* with their inescapable premise -- that prevailing circumstances largely dictate the "appropriateness" of behaviors. However, that hardly concurs with the fundamental "absolutes" of Christ's own teachings. (I'm NOT a Christian, merely raised as such.) ==== But then it emerges from the following, *scrupulously* scholarly bit of historical research that Christianity went to *great* lengths long ago to facilitate its own transition to the status of a "warrior religion" (and then some!), in *spite* of its founder's principles: Biblical Pacifism to the Crusades, By Nat Parry [Consortium News] ==== Though the Crusades date back almost a millennium, that history still colors the events playing out today in the Middle East. Muslims, across the political spectrum, view the U.S.-backed military interventions through the prism of the Crusades -- and many denounce George W. Bush as the new crusader. ==== But the Crusades also marked a profound change in Christendom, consolidating a transformation from Jesus's religion of peace to one that launched invasions of far-off lands and inflicted unspeakable brutality in Christ's name. In this historical analysis, Nat Parry looks at the concepts of Biblical pacifism and "just wars" as they evolved from the Sermon on the Mount to the sacking of Constantinople. ... ==== [The history disclosed in the article provides a genuinely horrific revelation of how incredibly barbarous professed "Christians" can be, under the presumption of "Divine" approval. Of course, *we* both know that full well from more recent events -- Hitler's rise to power and Bush's own. Both men depicted their causes as genuinely "Christian" endeavors. Bush even *openly* proclaimed "God's will" as the direct source of of his acts. Not even Hitler went quite *that* far, though he did skirt the fringes of such audacious claims. But it's clear from the above history that Christianity itself has no legitimate claim to any exemplary "righteousness" in matters of war. So assertions presumptively "condemning" Islam's commendably explicit codification of the proper conditions for, and conduct of, war are clearly a case of "the pot calling the kettle black"!]
MaNNNing: So should I assume that you, as a professed Christian, thoroughly reject the notion of "moral relativism" so obviously depicted in that writing? (As for "researching a peice [sic] ... intended to illustrate the awful facts that Christianity is a warrior religion", you can easily see for yourself that the research had *already* been done -- and it's rather devastating.) :-)
Ah nemo! Hilarious it was! One needn't do much research at all to know that Christians and Jews are damn good warriors when the call comes. It is an historical fact that most Christians know from their earliest teachings, and they have a firm belief that the faith, as well as the nation, will be defended by their members when attacked.
Moral relativism is a sinkhole for good social order, and so is moral absolutism, if either are taken to their extremes. The rational person therefore accepts a provisional moral code that leans toward absolutism,in the sense of it being a firmly-based code, but rejects extremism. For example, the "self-evident" truths, and "unalienable rights" in our founding documents, which most Americans ascribe to with great passion, is a firmly-based code.
Moral relativism produces more evil and moral uncertainty than good, in my opinion. However, moral extremism is a sin, whether relative or absolute, as much of history attests, whether in war or peace.
I have no real knowledge of the Jewish religion and its fundamental positions here, but I suspect the Jewish religion leans more toward the Old Testament views: an "eye for an eye" sort of thing. Not a crowd to rile up.
I further suspect that the Israelis will carry out their plan regardless of the opinion of the World, the UN, the EU, the US, France, the UK or Germany, and their very empty words in the eyes of Israel. To them it is survival in the long term without constant incursions, kidnapings, killings, bombs, or missiles raining on them from Hezbollah and Hamas.
These Muslim organizations are dedicated to one thing: the destruction of the Jewish nation, and they are not reticent in declaring it, because their religion says so.
Thus, to me, we have the old irresistable force meeting the immovable object in this fight, and there are two choices: intervene now, and simply delay the killings for a year or so; or not to intervene, and let the war peter out when both sides have just about had enough.
Then step in with external forces that are up to the task of enforcing the grudging peace. But, of course, we have a model of UN peacekeeping efforts right there on the border for the last 28 years to no descernable effect, except to provide cover for Hezbollah when they wanted it.
No one wants the third alternative now, which would ultimately lead to WWIII or IV, depending on how you count. But the ultimate war is on the horizon, no matter what we in the West do.
The continuing problem is, what forces are up to it, sooner or later, and are acceptable to both Hezbollah (Iran and Syria too)and Israel? This is too far above my pay grade to consider.
MaNNNing: Being as you haven't *directly* answered the question ASKED, "Should I assume that you, as a professed Christian, thoroughly reject the notion of "moral relativism" so obviously depicted in that writing?", and being as what little "answer" you have provided looks to sigtnify both "Yes" and "No" simultaneously -- I fail to see *any* meaningful distinction between "moral relativism" and what you've dubbed a "provisional moral code" -- should I conclude that you're once again evading a relatively simple question?? (To illustrate, you opine in your response, "The rational person therefore accepts a provisional moral code ... ". But I'm not eliciting your opinion of what a "rational person" does; I'm asking what YOU believe. The entrenched ambiguity of the "reply" leaves your own convictions utterly unspecified.) Naturally, you can't have it BOTH ways. So which is it -- YEA or NAY? (A simple, straightforward ANSWER would suffice, though I know it's exceedingly difficult for you to avoid floating abundant digressions and extraneous opinions in any "response" you might offer.) ==== I naturally assume you simply haven't availed yourself of the contents of that historical research posted above. If you had, you'd obviously have found little to "laugh" about. But I must say, in light of the historical *realities* of early Christian beliefs relayed in that article, your own bald assertion, "It is an historical fact that most Christians know from their earliest teachings, and they have a firm belief that the faith, as well as the nation, will be defended by their members when attacked," is the very height of "hilarity", particularly since it mirrors *precisely* the teachings of the Quran, yet resembles not in the *least* the teachings of Christ! (Quite obviously, when you trot out the phrase. "historical fact", it means no such thing, as the article clearly indicates.) ==== Nevertheless, I await your *concrete* reply to my question. (It's reiterated in bold above, in case you'd forgotten.) Frankly, I can't see any reason why you'd perceive a need to "beat around the bush" on this one!
The answer is indeed simple, yet you refused to see it. A rational person, being myself, adopted a provisional moral code to reject and avoid the excesses of both totally absolute morality and the sinful permissiveness of moral relativity.
Since I cannot prove the existence of God, yet I do elect to believe in Him, I operate on an "as if they were true" basis across the spectrum of Christian moral dictates. You should read such authors as C.S. Lewis, Hans Vaihinger, and Michael Shermer to see a fuller explication of "as if" provisionalism.
It is quite apparent that your knowledge of both Christianity and Islam is seriously deficient, most likely caused by your ingrained biases or atheism. There is "no precisely the same as the Qur'an" in my statement. That is a fiction you invented for whatever your devious purposes might be. I challenge you to make a one-to-one comparison between the teachings of Jesus and Mohammad to prove their similarity.
As far as I am concerned, that which happened in the Crusades is in the far past, and in no way represents the Christianity of today that I know, and it certainly doesn't represent my own Christian beliefs.
However, since virtually NONE of the teachings of Muhammad have been abrogated to this date, rather, they have been reenforced explicitly in this century, any comparison of the two religions now will certainly highlight the enormous moral gulf between them.
In a highly significant sense, that is exactly today's problem with Islam: it has NOT progressed either morally or socially from its 8th century past, while Christianity has progressed immensely, along with a far more careful, explicit and implicit separation of the functions of the goverment from the functions of the church in the West.
These factors are central to the current richness of the capitalistic West versus the moral and physical impovrishment of the majority of Muslims, despite billions and billions of petrodollars poured into their nations.:)
"It is quite apparent that your knowledge of both Christianity and Islam is seriously deficient, most likely caused by your ingrained biases or atheism. ==== Yeah, that ~must~ be it. Whereas you're habitually unable to substantiate ANY of your allegedly "factual" assertions, it must undoubtedly be I who "doesn't know what he's talking about". Uh huh. (Asshole.) ==== Incidentally, your lack of any genuine "clairvoyant abilities" is once again strikingly obvious -- I'm by no means an atheist, you TWIT! But then, you're clearly no Christian, other than "in name only", hypocrite! Moral relativism is *exactly* what you're preaching here -- and a very ugly, twisted, glaringly racist form,at that! The only thing that's truly been made quite apparent, throughout this "discussion", has been the fact that you're completely [LOL, Ha!, Hilarious!] FULL OF SHIT!
What a child! Truly infantile. Can't read, can't be civil, can't do anything but throw garbage on the page at every opportunity. Must never have had soap in the mouth when an early child.
You aren't worth replying to, imbecile!
again: You seem to have a philosophical bent, and perhaps an understanding of the purposes of the "as if" construct...followed by application of the concept to personal philosophy by enumeration of specific tenets that "as if" is applied to, and based on the fact that existence proofs are not available for these tenets in many cases.
My prime example of this is my personal tenet that God exists, and I act in accord with this "as if" it is true. All else follows, including the subtenets of a Christian life. In this case, "as if" is equated with belief, even when I also believe I cannot demonstrate a proof of His existence. Can anyone?
mannning
even when I also believe I cannot demonstrate a proof of His existence. Can anyone?
to cite Douglas Adams:
"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
Exactly!
Post a Comment
<< Home