CXT, you are blabbering again. Context schmontext. Courage does not require smarts or understanding. Don't get so worked up about it. It certainly takes courage to die for your beliefs--I would argue beliefs that make you die for them require reevaluation in most cases--and probably MORE if you have to contemplate it rather than do it impulsively.
As for your off target examples, don't tell me what I believe when you can't get past a dictionary definition.
Dahmer and Jack didn't do anything courageous. Nonsense to include them.
Shephard's murderers were motivated by hate, not religious belief. Nor is ANYTHING religious automatically courageous, so it wouldn't matter if they were.
Taking out abortion providers is murder in my eye and it's saving innocent lives to some people--akin to taking out a Nazi during the Holocaust. Taking out that Nazi at great risk to oneself: courageous. Taking out an abortionist: could be severely misguided courage; could just be religious killing. Have to look at the context. Courage isn't automatically present because someone was killed or saved. It's ... well, read the definition again.
People differ in serious ways during conflict. Both sides have courageous participants. Only one side writes the history and decides whose courage was on target.
There ARE intellegent christians in america.
Moderator: Available
IJ
Weird since you like parse everything out so much you would fail to do so this time.
Dahmer and Jack the Ripper knew well the penelties for doing what they did---death for the Ripper and maybe death for Dahmer......by your and Mahrs overly generous interpreation of "courage" how can risking death to do what you want to do not argued as "couragous?"
See, told you it was overly broad.
"Shepard murderers were motivated by hate....not relgious beliefs"
A-As were the 9/11 hijackers---their "religious belief" involves hatred and even killing of the "infidel."
Again, Mahr is no longer consistant with his own internal logic here.
B-Why did Shephard killers "hate" him? Could their "relgious beliefs" have anything to do with it?
And on that score---maybe their secular beliefs played a role?.........and after all what is "religion" but a "belief system" held to be absoultely true?
C-They also risked death and lifelong imprisonment for there actions........you don't think it takes "courage" to face down death and lifetime in prision????
Careful on this one IJ----there is a logical trap here---one you introduced BTW.
"Taking out abortion providers is murder in my eye"
Mine too-----but in your and Mahrs use of the term "courage" it applies to such acts as well---kinda why I dislike "courage" in you and Mahrs use of the term--is rather strongly a positive word---and murderers of any stripe IMO do not deserve the postive implication of the word.
If one defines "courage" as the killing of large numbers of innocent unaware defenseless people....then what acts and whom doesn't that now argueable have to be applied to????
If you define it so broadly and apply it to such henious acts---then you have opened door the for pretty much everybody to spin the term as well.
I'm sure that Tim McVey thought of himself as "courageous"---I'm equally sure that he has some wacked buddies that agree with him------the guys that beat Shepard to death also have people that look up to them--sick bastards.
I simply think its wrong to assign any positive verbage to such horrific acts.
"Only one side writes the history and decides whose courage was on target"
If this was Freshman Philosphy 101--I'd buy that answer as sufficent---but since its not...... I'd have to say that such relativism is misplaced and invalid.
To accpet that relativistic POV is to regulate all ethicial and moral postions to "just" POV's----which taken litterally---as you do the defination of "courage" leads......to some pretty wacked conclusions and takes us to places where serial killers and murderers are spoken of as showing "courage."
On the subject of relativity--its often misused.....one guy pointed out the common saying "one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter" is flawed---re-stateing it as "one mans rapist is another mans hero" is closer to the mark.
Easier to see the logical flaws that way.
Weird since you like parse everything out so much you would fail to do so this time.
Dahmer and Jack the Ripper knew well the penelties for doing what they did---death for the Ripper and maybe death for Dahmer......by your and Mahrs overly generous interpreation of "courage" how can risking death to do what you want to do not argued as "couragous?"
See, told you it was overly broad.
"Shepard murderers were motivated by hate....not relgious beliefs"
A-As were the 9/11 hijackers---their "religious belief" involves hatred and even killing of the "infidel."
Again, Mahr is no longer consistant with his own internal logic here.
B-Why did Shephard killers "hate" him? Could their "relgious beliefs" have anything to do with it?
And on that score---maybe their secular beliefs played a role?.........and after all what is "religion" but a "belief system" held to be absoultely true?
C-They also risked death and lifelong imprisonment for there actions........you don't think it takes "courage" to face down death and lifetime in prision????
Careful on this one IJ----there is a logical trap here---one you introduced BTW.
"Taking out abortion providers is murder in my eye"
Mine too-----but in your and Mahrs use of the term "courage" it applies to such acts as well---kinda why I dislike "courage" in you and Mahrs use of the term--is rather strongly a positive word---and murderers of any stripe IMO do not deserve the postive implication of the word.
If one defines "courage" as the killing of large numbers of innocent unaware defenseless people....then what acts and whom doesn't that now argueable have to be applied to????
If you define it so broadly and apply it to such henious acts---then you have opened door the for pretty much everybody to spin the term as well.
I'm sure that Tim McVey thought of himself as "courageous"---I'm equally sure that he has some wacked buddies that agree with him------the guys that beat Shepard to death also have people that look up to them--sick bastards.
I simply think its wrong to assign any positive verbage to such horrific acts.
"Only one side writes the history and decides whose courage was on target"
If this was Freshman Philosphy 101--I'd buy that answer as sufficent---but since its not...... I'd have to say that such relativism is misplaced and invalid.
To accpet that relativistic POV is to regulate all ethicial and moral postions to "just" POV's----which taken litterally---as you do the defination of "courage" leads......to some pretty wacked conclusions and takes us to places where serial killers and murderers are spoken of as showing "courage."
On the subject of relativity--its often misused.....one guy pointed out the common saying "one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter" is flawed---re-stateing it as "one mans rapist is another mans hero" is closer to the mark.
Easier to see the logical flaws that way.
Forget #6, you are now serving nonsense.
HH
HH
You are stretching the definition of the word "courage" in a ridiculous fashion in an attempt to make your point. This "ad absurdum" trick is a standby for you. In this case, you're implying because people do something which could result in death, or imprisonment, they're courageous. In fact, the definition had two uses, most often paired--standing up to adversity, and sticking up for your beliefs.
If you want to get specific here, the 9/11 terrorists were certainly courageous by the standards of their beliefs and many many other people. They took action against the Great Satan, a huge military power, and by force of will trained themselves for years to sacrifice themselves. They controlled a larger group, took over planes, and gave their lives for their beliefs. Was this admirable? Absolutely not in my book. Did it require courage? How else do you describe coolly ending your life like that? These were misguided, brainwashed, destestible, monstrous acts of courage.
Shepard's murderers took him to a deserted place and beat him to death. They went two on one (one very small man) and they still needed a large gun. Then they ran. These are losers who I'm sure, would be afraid to stand up in a crowd and speak out about their beliefs, and ran from their act, getting caught only by their own stupidity. They didn't stick up for anything. They didn't confront any danger. They were cowards.
What about McVeigh? He planted a bomb and ran. He considered himself a patriot, but I'm sure he also imagined himself as being courageous just for facing the US government. The facts make it hard for that to be true. He DID later say he was prepared to defend the bomb with small arms until it was ready to detonate, giving his life facing off swat teams to complete his mission. THAT would have been brave. But he didn't have to do it. He ran off, getting caught by his own stupidity and really bad luck, and only spoke out once he was nabbed.
Listen, your point appears to be to argue with mine, not to make one of your own. IF you were to have a point, it seems that it would be that courage requires to be in the right according to... you? That is not borne out by the definition or by a look into other cultures where millions found the 9/11 acts courageous. The only point you are making is an absurd extension of bravery and courage to include any act with possible consequences that could be severe, essentially including driving to work and smoking a cig. Now, this may be opaque to you, but when I spoke about facing down adversity and death with cool resolve, I wasn't speaking about tiny risks or the possibility of getting caught (something, for example, the Shephard killers may have considered and attempted to avoid, however clumsily, but not something that they weighed and decided to risk because of the importance of their task). I was speaking about the way, you know, literate english speaking people use the words--in the context of common sense. If you don't get my point, well, I can't help you, and I'm already slightly disappointed in myself for bothering to refute another silly gripe from you about a detail, this time in Maher's movie. I won't be responding about this, so if you miss my replies, read a dictionary or something.
I'm going to go courageously consume a diet soda.
If you want to get specific here, the 9/11 terrorists were certainly courageous by the standards of their beliefs and many many other people. They took action against the Great Satan, a huge military power, and by force of will trained themselves for years to sacrifice themselves. They controlled a larger group, took over planes, and gave their lives for their beliefs. Was this admirable? Absolutely not in my book. Did it require courage? How else do you describe coolly ending your life like that? These were misguided, brainwashed, destestible, monstrous acts of courage.
Shepard's murderers took him to a deserted place and beat him to death. They went two on one (one very small man) and they still needed a large gun. Then they ran. These are losers who I'm sure, would be afraid to stand up in a crowd and speak out about their beliefs, and ran from their act, getting caught only by their own stupidity. They didn't stick up for anything. They didn't confront any danger. They were cowards.
What about McVeigh? He planted a bomb and ran. He considered himself a patriot, but I'm sure he also imagined himself as being courageous just for facing the US government. The facts make it hard for that to be true. He DID later say he was prepared to defend the bomb with small arms until it was ready to detonate, giving his life facing off swat teams to complete his mission. THAT would have been brave. But he didn't have to do it. He ran off, getting caught by his own stupidity and really bad luck, and only spoke out once he was nabbed.
Listen, your point appears to be to argue with mine, not to make one of your own. IF you were to have a point, it seems that it would be that courage requires to be in the right according to... you? That is not borne out by the definition or by a look into other cultures where millions found the 9/11 acts courageous. The only point you are making is an absurd extension of bravery and courage to include any act with possible consequences that could be severe, essentially including driving to work and smoking a cig. Now, this may be opaque to you, but when I spoke about facing down adversity and death with cool resolve, I wasn't speaking about tiny risks or the possibility of getting caught (something, for example, the Shephard killers may have considered and attempted to avoid, however clumsily, but not something that they weighed and decided to risk because of the importance of their task). I was speaking about the way, you know, literate english speaking people use the words--in the context of common sense. If you don't get my point, well, I can't help you, and I'm already slightly disappointed in myself for bothering to refute another silly gripe from you about a detail, this time in Maher's movie. I won't be responding about this, so if you miss my replies, read a dictionary or something.
I'm going to go courageously consume a diet soda.
--Ian
-
fivedragons
- Posts: 1573
- Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:05 am
Hey that's a good question Adam, let's try it out.
A possible synonym for courage could be something like tenacity. The resolve to accomplish something regardless of the odds.
A possible synonym for insanity could be ? Gee I don't know, mental illness. How do we define that? Well, we can look at mental illness as a set of behaviors that don't really fit in with the general pattern of behavior or thought practiced by the majority of people who are within some degree of practical proximity to the subject.
So, courage could easily be considered insanity in someone's perspective, and insanity could easily be labeled as a state of courageousness. Or just the wrong mixture of chemicals in the brain.
It depends on the perspective and who has the power to do the labeling.
Which pretty much sums up what we have found out about quantum physics, so far.
I've always been intrigued by the "connection" between genius and madness.
Some people just can't seem to deal with the fact that there is no objective reality, outside of the one they as the subject decide on.
So we all subjectively decide what objective reality is.
Deal with it, people. No one said life would be easy.
But if you pay attention, it is quite beautiful.
Yeah, that wasn't such a great idea, and we shouldn't have tried it out.
A possible synonym for courage could be something like tenacity. The resolve to accomplish something regardless of the odds.
A possible synonym for insanity could be ? Gee I don't know, mental illness. How do we define that? Well, we can look at mental illness as a set of behaviors that don't really fit in with the general pattern of behavior or thought practiced by the majority of people who are within some degree of practical proximity to the subject.
So, courage could easily be considered insanity in someone's perspective, and insanity could easily be labeled as a state of courageousness. Or just the wrong mixture of chemicals in the brain.
It depends on the perspective and who has the power to do the labeling.
Which pretty much sums up what we have found out about quantum physics, so far.
I've always been intrigued by the "connection" between genius and madness.
Some people just can't seem to deal with the fact that there is no objective reality, outside of the one they as the subject decide on.
So we all subjectively decide what objective reality is.
Deal with it, people. No one said life would be easy.
But if you pay attention, it is quite beautiful.
Yeah, that wasn't such a great idea, and we shouldn't have tried it out.
Last edited by fivedragons on Fri Oct 17, 2008 7:35 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
fivedragons
- Posts: 1573
- Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:05 am
I write, so connotations mean a lot to me.
I wouldn't say tenacity is sufficient for courage. You could just be sticking to a long, tedious task, at no risk to yourself. Nor is it necessary; you can do something instantly which is courageous, like taking a bullet for the (NEXT!) President. I think it's harder sometimes to do something when you have more time to ponder the consequences, much how Mel's character in Braveheart courageously faced death by torture. Christ would be another good example. He had an assured good outcome, but a hellish road to it.
Can insanity inspire courage? They're overlapping. If you have a paranoia or delusions that you believe require a courageous act, sure. If the insanity you suffer from prevents you from understanding the risks to yourself, on the other hand, then it precludes courage. You just have blind action.
Ah, I love the net. From thesaurus.com:
Courage: audacious, bold, brave, chivalrous, fortitudinous, herculean, intrepid, resolute, spartan
Insanity: aberration, absurdity, alienation, craziness, delirium, delusion, dementia, derangement, distraction, dotage, folly, frenzy, hallucination, hysteria, illusion, inanity, irrationality, irresponsibility, lunacy, madness, mania, mental disorder, neurosis, phobia, preposterousness, psychopathy, psychosis, senselessness, unbalance, unreasonableness, witlessness
I wouldn't say tenacity is sufficient for courage. You could just be sticking to a long, tedious task, at no risk to yourself. Nor is it necessary; you can do something instantly which is courageous, like taking a bullet for the (NEXT!) President. I think it's harder sometimes to do something when you have more time to ponder the consequences, much how Mel's character in Braveheart courageously faced death by torture. Christ would be another good example. He had an assured good outcome, but a hellish road to it.
Can insanity inspire courage? They're overlapping. If you have a paranoia or delusions that you believe require a courageous act, sure. If the insanity you suffer from prevents you from understanding the risks to yourself, on the other hand, then it precludes courage. You just have blind action.
Ah, I love the net. From thesaurus.com:
Courage: audacious, bold, brave, chivalrous, fortitudinous, herculean, intrepid, resolute, spartan
Insanity: aberration, absurdity, alienation, craziness, delirium, delusion, dementia, derangement, distraction, dotage, folly, frenzy, hallucination, hysteria, illusion, inanity, irrationality, irresponsibility, lunacy, madness, mania, mental disorder, neurosis, phobia, preposterousness, psychopathy, psychosis, senselessness, unbalance, unreasonableness, witlessness
--Ian
Interesting... can anyone remind me where this courage quote we've been talking about comes from? Because I just saw the movie and he doesn't applaud religious people for anything. He says they're fools for being certain and they ought to learn to doubt. He pokes fun, entertained the presumably 99% atheist audience and admonished the nonbelievers to rise up and assert themselves instead of letting people who think we might be in the end times and buy the myths they've been taught without thinking aim the nukes. I liked it, but hey, I've already ben saying I'm scared of those pseudocertain fundies who win by a hair, claim a mandate, and set an unwavering course based on conviction over fact. Scary stuff.
Interesting little segment on Jesus/Horus in that movie. Claims the whole Jesus tale was stolen from Egypt (I hear lots of the Koran and Book of Mormon were borrowed from the Bible). Here's a list of some of the purported similarities:
http://forum.thedailyshow.com/tds/board ... ead.id=315
Does anyone have the rebuttal?
Interesting little segment on Jesus/Horus in that movie. Claims the whole Jesus tale was stolen from Egypt (I hear lots of the Koran and Book of Mormon were borrowed from the Bible). Here's a list of some of the purported similarities:
http://forum.thedailyshow.com/tds/board ... ead.id=315
Does anyone have the rebuttal?
--Ian
IJ
And IMO, you and Mahr are being way to loose and sloppy with your application of the defiantion of courage.
Or more precisely you guys failed to consider the ramifications of being so narrow with the term.
"certainly...(the 9/11 terrorist)......were couragous by the standards by of their beliefs and many many other people"
And by that line of ahm...."reasoning"
so are the guys that shoot abortion providers and blow up abortion clinics.........so were the Nazi's.......so were the Thugge and and Assassin....so are Skinheads, so are KKK members.....so were the people that killed Medger Eveans and blew up those little girls in Birmingham....so was McVeigh.
As you say they were "misguided, brainwashed, detestable,monsterous acts"....acts which in my opinion do not deserve to be dignifiedw with the largely positive term of "courage."
As long as people regard such as actions as couragous and not cowardly and henious then you will get more such act......to grant such horror the dignity of viewing it as requireing "courage" is to in some way help justify them........make them more palatible.......more acceptable.
"Listen your point here appears to be to argue with mine"
Nope, my "point" was to point out Mahr's foolishness and lack of rigor in his thinking.
I'm only dealing with you because:
A-You felt ideological required to defend Mahrs sloppyness.
B-You felt the need to challange my points.........no doubt simply because I made them.
"absurd extention"
Nope, what is "absurd" is your overly narrow defiantion and use of the term........you and Mahr's use would require that no act could be so aweful, henious and cowardly that it could not, somehow, in some fashion, be spun as showing some sort of courage.
I simply feel a bit more rigor be used with said term is preferrable, advatagous and indeed warrented.
Besides again by Mahrs personal worldview the relgiously motivated 9/11 hijackers were too stupid or too crazy to really understand their actions....thus by Mahr's context......they couldn't be couragous.
Oh, BTW..."how else do you decribe cooly ending your life"
Since there is some question of just how many of the hijackers actually knew it was a suicide mission.......and other such murder bombers have been clinically mental ill, or very low IQ, chained to their cars, raped and essentially forced to "regain their honor" by such methods, using childen, essentially brainwashed etc......I'd say there are multiple ways to descibe it that do not require some sort of positive verbage for their ghastly actions.
"I'm already slightly disapointed with myself for bothering to refute."
Don't be IJ--you didn't "refute" anything at all.
You just led us down the overgrown, weed filled and stagnate path of your ideological garden.
And IMO, you and Mahr are being way to loose and sloppy with your application of the defiantion of courage.
Or more precisely you guys failed to consider the ramifications of being so narrow with the term.
"certainly...(the 9/11 terrorist)......were couragous by the standards by of their beliefs and many many other people"
And by that line of ahm...."reasoning"
so are the guys that shoot abortion providers and blow up abortion clinics.........so were the Nazi's.......so were the Thugge and and Assassin....so are Skinheads, so are KKK members.....so were the people that killed Medger Eveans and blew up those little girls in Birmingham....so was McVeigh.As you say they were "misguided, brainwashed, detestable,monsterous acts"....acts which in my opinion do not deserve to be dignifiedw with the largely positive term of "courage."
As long as people regard such as actions as couragous and not cowardly and henious then you will get more such act......to grant such horror the dignity of viewing it as requireing "courage" is to in some way help justify them........make them more palatible.......more acceptable.
"Listen your point here appears to be to argue with mine"
Nope, my "point" was to point out Mahr's foolishness and lack of rigor in his thinking.
I'm only dealing with you because:
A-You felt ideological required to defend Mahrs sloppyness.
B-You felt the need to challange my points.........no doubt simply because I made them.
"absurd extention"
Nope, what is "absurd" is your overly narrow defiantion and use of the term........you and Mahr's use would require that no act could be so aweful, henious and cowardly that it could not, somehow, in some fashion, be spun as showing some sort of courage.
I simply feel a bit more rigor be used with said term is preferrable, advatagous and indeed warrented.
Besides again by Mahrs personal worldview the relgiously motivated 9/11 hijackers were too stupid or too crazy to really understand their actions....thus by Mahr's context......they couldn't be couragous.
Oh, BTW..."how else do you decribe cooly ending your life"
Since there is some question of just how many of the hijackers actually knew it was a suicide mission.......and other such murder bombers have been clinically mental ill, or very low IQ, chained to their cars, raped and essentially forced to "regain their honor" by such methods, using childen, essentially brainwashed etc......I'd say there are multiple ways to descibe it that do not require some sort of positive verbage for their ghastly actions.
"I'm already slightly disapointed with myself for bothering to refute."
Don't be IJ--you didn't "refute" anything at all.
You just led us down the overgrown, weed filled and stagnate path of your ideological garden.
Forget #6, you are now serving nonsense.
HH
HH
CXT, the dictionary definition is what it is and does not mention understanding or motive (despite your protestations). It does not mean that every evil act you list is courageous. You're a big fan of claiming I like to dictate policy singlehandedly, because I've told you what the law is on other threads. Well, there are a billion Muslims out there, and many of them thought the 9/11 suicide attacks displayed courage. Yes, people may disagree, but this is true in just about every issue.
So: I didn't feel ideologically required to defend Maher or attack you, I just noticed a badly written post. I've also watched the movie and was unable to spot any point in which he congratulates religious people for courage. Did he mention this in an interview? Well, big whoopie, if so--people don't always come across the best when they're reading a speech, much less giving an interview, and it would be a little silly of you to seize on one single word and harp on it for a month. Why not.... talk about the other 99.99% of his points, and the movie? I've said before that Bush is a bad public speaker, but that's because he didn't have one gaffe, but an endless series of them, and you don't see me taking on Bush for 10 posts because he said "Too many OB-GYNs, are unable to practice their... love, for women." That's just a slip up. And while Maher's point was correct according to the reference on this issue, you're rambling on about it when if he had just said "fearless" or "determined," or "courageous in the eyes of their followers," all would apparently be ok with you. Get over it.
Your last point: some suicide attackers may not have been aware of their mission or may have been retarded. Ok... THEY would not have met the definition of courage, and that would NOT have anything to do with what I said--"coolly ending your life." So--besides the point. Unless you're trying to convince us suicide attack planners are bad people, in which case, I wholeheartedly agree.
So: I didn't feel ideologically required to defend Maher or attack you, I just noticed a badly written post. I've also watched the movie and was unable to spot any point in which he congratulates religious people for courage. Did he mention this in an interview? Well, big whoopie, if so--people don't always come across the best when they're reading a speech, much less giving an interview, and it would be a little silly of you to seize on one single word and harp on it for a month. Why not.... talk about the other 99.99% of his points, and the movie? I've said before that Bush is a bad public speaker, but that's because he didn't have one gaffe, but an endless series of them, and you don't see me taking on Bush for 10 posts because he said "Too many OB-GYNs, are unable to practice their... love, for women." That's just a slip up. And while Maher's point was correct according to the reference on this issue, you're rambling on about it when if he had just said "fearless" or "determined," or "courageous in the eyes of their followers," all would apparently be ok with you. Get over it.
Your last point: some suicide attackers may not have been aware of their mission or may have been retarded. Ok... THEY would not have met the definition of courage, and that would NOT have anything to do with what I said--"coolly ending your life." So--besides the point. Unless you're trying to convince us suicide attack planners are bad people, in which case, I wholeheartedly agree.
--Ian
-
fivedragons
- Posts: 1573
- Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:05 am
Jesus Christ, CXT or whatever your name is, you need to let go on the word courage. You're engaging in a debate with yourself. If someone decides to sacrifice their life in the service of whatever cause they feel is real, that is courage. No matter how wrong or right you or I might feel about the cause.
The word "courage" wasn't invented by you to reflect self sacrifice by someone who follows your personal moral code or logical philosophy. Get the ##### over it.
The word "courage" wasn't invented by you to reflect self sacrifice by someone who follows your personal moral code or logical philosophy. Get the ##### over it.
-
fivedragons
- Posts: 1573
- Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:05 am
Dude, you're an ass, and you don't stand alone on an island, defending with a sword everything that is right in this world.
I am another person standing on an island, and I can easily refute everything Ian has ever postulated. The only question remaining is, will he listen to reason?
Stay tuned.....
I am another person standing on an island, and I can easily refute everything Ian has ever postulated. The only question remaining is, will he listen to reason?
Stay tuned.....
