IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New No "right", no "wrong". Only viewpoints.
Is it a noble thing to give you life for your religion? Yes, for most people.
If you value your religion that much. Those that say "no" do not value their religion that much.

Now, when you ask if it's a noble thing to kill a bunch of women and children while giving your life for your religion, I expect the answers to vary a bit more.
Yes, because different people value women and children higher than their religion. Others do not.

If they don't it tells me someting about the people who answered.
Yes, that they value their religion above the lives of women and children.

However, the way question was asked, it's impossible to conclude anything at all.
I'll disagree on that. I don't think you'd get the same results if you asked it in the US.

Now, if you substituted "Christianity" for "Islam" and asked it in the US, you'd get different results.

What this is showing is that Islam is VERY IMPORTANT to LOTS of people over there.

And the mistake we keep making is assuming that it isn't.
New I think it's happening again.
We are in a violent agreement. Ask "Is it a noble thing to sacrifice your life for <insert your favorite religion here>?", and you get a universal yes. This is not a meaningful or useful question. Ask if it's ok to kill civilians while doing so, and the answer can be used to draw some conclusions. For example, a conclusion that innocent lives are more important than religion. Or less. I do not know how Arabs and/or Americans would have answered. The question was not asked.
--

We have only 2 things to worry about: That
things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.
New Umm no universal 'yes' on that first one.
Unless you mean - the traditional 'yes' which keeps the religious wars in an endless loop? But that has never been universal, only Popular amongst the powerless masses.

It may be that the standard wars can end only when the in-power minority in the powerful States - who always rise to that power by manipulating mass sentiment - outgrow a POV which places the welfare of a planet beneath internal personal fantasies of the Unknowable. Could happen.

This might even be the century. Then again, we aren't growing noticeably more adult thus far - and with nukes all over the place, the Question may become moot before we ever took the chance to grow up.


Ashton
New Not "give your life for". Rather "suicide".
As always, there's the subtle shift of focus.

I can "give my life for Freedom" while trying to stay alive during the battle.

I can even go on "suicide missions" where there's a slim chance I can fight my way back to friendly lines.

But, "is it a good thing to strap dynamite to your body and blow up some enemies"...........

That was the nature of the question posed.

As always, people over here do not grasp the DIFFERENCE in the cultures.

It may be that the standard wars can end only when the in-power minority in the powerful States - who always rise to that power by manipulating mass sentiment - outgrow a POV which places the welfare of a planet beneath internal personal fantasies of the Unknowable.
It might. But I wouldn't bet on it. Not any time soon. I don't think the human race, as a whole, is yet capable of handling multiple viewpoints. Or even realizing that multiple viewpoints exist.

It all gets back to the basic incantation of "right / wrong" and "good / evil".

Once you can define the world in broad terms, you don't need to waste your time looking for any deeper.

So, we start the indoctrination early. Sunday School. The Pledge of Allegiance. Teaching our sanitized history (where we are always the good guys).

Most people stop thinking / learning in their teens.
New Re: Not "give your life for". Rather "suicide".
When you have no other weapon, your body becomes one. Just a matter of degree. For God's sake, this question could not reveal the difference between you and Marlowe - you're both likely to answer "Yes".
--

We have only 2 things to worry about: That
things will never get back to normal, and that they already have.
     for every hightech success there is a lowtech workaround - (boxley) - (15)
         Not surprising. [add BBC link] - (a6l6e6x) - (11)
             I hardly think so, tunnel vision a tad - (boxley) - (10)
                 Hmmmm. - (Brandioch) - (9)
                     well we could help them out by wiping out Israel - (boxley)
                     Nice. - (Arkadiy) - (7)
                         Let's go over "viewpoint" again. - (Brandioch) - (6)
                             My point was not about right and wrong - (Arkadiy) - (5)
                                 No "right", no "wrong". Only viewpoints. - (Brandioch) - (4)
                                     I think it's happening again. - (Arkadiy) - (3)
                                         Umm no universal 'yes' on that first one. - (Ashton) - (2)
                                             Not "give your life for". Rather "suicide". - (Brandioch) - (1)
                                                 Re: Not "give your life for". Rather "suicide". - (Arkadiy)
         Soo-prize, Soo-prize, Soo-PRIZE!!! - (jb4)
         Duh - (wharris2)
         Robert Fisk again? - (marlowe)

Yes, m'lord.
111 ms