Re: Good and evil (was Re: Reviews for Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ")
From: Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Good and evil (was Re: Reviews for Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ") Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2004 08:04:58 -0800 Travis Edmunds wrote: Travis Edmunds wrote: Ah yes. You "believe". I for one, believe that views like that, hold back any sort of honest discourse. I'm unclear on the antecedent of "views like that." Theirs, or mine? Yours of course. After all you said you "believe". Now it seems as though you object to my having beliefs, or having beliefs in general. Goodness no! What I meant, was that by someone believing something, it doesn't necessarily render that particular something true. There's plenty of room for that Nick. But when your "beliefs" interfere with the open discourse of this forum, you become just as bad as those you despise. I don't believe that I said I despised anybody. I said that polarizing important issues is self-evidently harmful, in my opinion. I spoke of the people behind those quotes that you evidently don't like. Furthermore, I hesitate to think that the cause of religiously fanatical hate mongering is being furthered by someone quoting so-called "evil" comments. Especially on this forum. For that matter, we probably shouldn't talk about anything other than good wholesome sci-fi, with no more than an action based plot which never deviates from space battles, and which certainly doesn't bring forth controversial ideas. It's safer that way right? I don't believe that I suggested that there are topics that don't belong here, which is how I read the paragraph above. My objection was to the quoting of hate-mongers as though their venom contributed anything to the discussion at hand. Forgive me. That's what I read into you comments. -Travis "if only we were telepathic" Edmunds _ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Good and evil (was Re: Reviews for Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ")
At 10:04 AM 2/6/04, Nick Arnett wrote: I'm not the least bit offended. I aim to take nothing personally. FWIW, ditto. -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Good and evil (was Re: Reviews for Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ")
Travis Edmunds wrote: Travis Edmunds wrote: Ah yes. You "believe". I for one, believe that views like that, hold back any sort of honest discourse. I'm unclear on the antecedent of "views like that." Theirs, or mine? Yours of course. After all you said you "believe". Now it seems as though you object to my having beliefs, or having beliefs in general. As a side note, I'll mention that when I was little, I called my father's briefcase his "beliefcase," which was far funnier given that my dad taught philosophy for a living. There's plenty of room for that Nick. But when your "beliefs" interfere with the open discourse of this forum, you become just as bad as those you despise. I don't believe that I said I despised anybody. I said that polarizing important issues is self-evidently harmful, in my opinion. Furthermore, I hesitate to think that the cause of religiously fanatical hate mongering is being furthered by someone quoting so-called "evil" comments. Especially on this forum. For that matter, we probably shouldn't talk about anything other than good wholesome sci-fi, with no more than an action based plot which never deviates from space battles, and which certainly doesn't bring forth controversial ideas. It's safer that way right? I don't believe that I suggested that there are topics that don't belong here, which is how I read the paragraph above. My objection was to the quoting of hate-mongers as though their venom contributed anything to the discussion at hand. Look, I'm not being argumentative just to be argumentative. It's just that I vehemently disagree with what you said, and I really do think that views like yours really do hold back, thinking, on any sort of acceptable level here on this forum. It seems humorous to me that you seem to be saying that I'm being close-minded, extremist, dogmatic, etc., by saying that I consider it harmful to repeat the words of close-minded, extremist, dogmatic, er, asshats. How does one give credibility to such views in the way that you mention? It implies those words have value in the context they were offered. If the context was "how to respond to hate-mongers," that might be true. But it wasn't. From here, it looked like the sort of propaganda technique used by demagogues. Proof? I think it is self-evident that treating important issues as black and white is bad. It's been my experience that nothing in this world is black & white. Combine that with the fact that you treated this issue as black & white, and you have an augument on your hands. Phooey, to the idea that I treated this issue as black-and-white. It seems that we agree that nothing in this world is so. It seems to me that while I was saying "I think that's harmful," you heard "you stop that." I'm sorry if I'm offending anyone; especially you Nick. But I honestly can't believe how closed-minded people can be at times. It's amazing. I'm not the least bit offended. I aim to take nothing personally. Nick -- Nick Arnett Director, Business Intelligence Services LiveWorld Inc. Phone/fax: (408) 904-7198 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Good and evil (was Re: Reviews for Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ")
At 07:51 AM 2/4/2004 -0800 Nick Arnett wrote: >Proof? I think it is self-evident that treating important issues as >black and white is bad. Did you truly mean to say that? The above is hardly self-evident to me.Indeed, I think that almost by definition, those few issues that happen to be black-and-white tend to be the most important. JDG ___ John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity." - George W. Bush 1/29/03 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Good and evil (was Re: Reviews for Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ")
At 03:49 PM 2/4/04, Travis Edmunds wrote: -Travis "hindsight is always 20/20" Edmunds Only if you wear size 40 pants. -- Ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Good and evil (was Re: Reviews for Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ")
From: Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Killer Bs Discussion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Good and evil (was Re: Reviews for Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ") Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 07:51:21 -0800 Travis Edmunds wrote: Ah yes. You "believe". I for one, believe that views like that, hold back any sort of honest discourse. I'm unclear on the antecedent of "views like that." Theirs, or mine? Yours of course. After all you said you "believe". Furthermore, to brand something evil, is to show either a narrow-minded approach to things, or a faithful belief in what you are spoon-fed. No room for it to be my point of view on what is good or evil? There's plenty of room for that Nick. But when your "beliefs" interfere with the open discourse of this forum, you become just as bad as those you despise. Furthermore, I hesitate to think that the cause of religiously fanatical hate mongering is being furthered by someone quoting so-called "evil" comments. Especially on this forum. For that matter, we probably shouldn't talk about anything other than good wholesome sci-fi, with no more than an action based plot which never deviates from space battles, and which certainly doesn't bring forth controversial ideas. It's safer that way right? Look, I'm not being argumentative just to be argumentative. It's just that I vehemently disagree with what you said, and I really do think that views like yours really do hold back, thinking, on any sort of acceptable level here on this forum. Prove to me however, that evil is a substantial thing and I may change my view of evil being a man-made concept. What would the nature of such a proof be? I believe that giving credibility to such views, by republishing them here, causes harm in the ways that you mention. They polarize the discussion, which pits two narrow-minded groups against each other, as they accept the spoon-fed simplifications offered by their "side." How does one give credibility to such views in the way that you mention? Other than these people doing a google search for their own quotes and finding them here, there is no basis for what you say. And when that particular issue comes face to face with what we are "allowed" and "not allowed" to talk about here, I think it gets greatly overshadowed. How in Gods name (pun intended) can we put a lid on what we discuss? For surely, that is where your original comments lead. Proof? I think it is self-evident that treating important issues as black and white is bad. Nick It's been my experience that nothing in this world is black & white. Combine that with the fact that you treated this issue as black & white, and you have an augument on your hands. I'm sorry if I'm offending anyone; especially you Nick. But I honestly can't believe how closed-minded people can be at times. It's amazing. -Travis _ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcomm&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Good and evil (was Re: Reviews for Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ")
Travis Edmunds wrote: Ah yes. You "believe". I for one, believe that views like that, hold back any sort of honest discourse. I'm unclear on the antecedent of "views like that." Theirs, or mine? Furthermore, to brand something evil, is to show either a narrow-minded approach to things, or a faithful belief in what you are spoon-fed. No room for it to be my point of view on what is good or evil? Prove to me however, that evil is a substantial thing and I may change my view of evil being a man-made concept. What would the nature of such a proof be? I believe that giving credibility to such views, by republishing them here, causes harm in the ways that you mention. They polarize the discussion, which pits two narrow-minded groups against each other, as they accept the spoon-fed simplifications offered by their "side." Proof? I think it is self-evident that treating important issues as black and white is bad. Nick -- Nick Arnett Director, Business Intelligence Services LiveWorld Inc. Phone/fax: (408) 904-7198 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
