 |
| |
|
|
Kidicious
|
 |
Diety of Kidiverse
Mar 2003
time: 21:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
quote:
You seem to be saying that you don't believe in his theory just because of this extreme case though. |
Well I don't consider it that extreme to his philosophy, but an integral part. But yes, I don't agree with his theory because I don't agree with the maximin.
|
Either do I in every specific theoretical case, but the case that you are talking about, you don't even identify real policies that would be affected by the case of a very small cost to a very small number of individuals and benefit to a very large number of individuals. That's why I'm asking you about real world problems. If there are no real world problems regarding this special case than who cares about it. You would be stupid for rejecting the model.
quote:
quote:
I think the problem is that you think that there are some theoretical model that are perfect depictions of the real world. There aren't. Rawls' model is no different from any other. |
So then he doesn't want his thoretical conclusions to apply to the real world? What then? Usually, even with theoretical exercises (like, say, the Social Contract), philosophers want to conclusions to apply to the actual world, even if they didn't start from the actual world. You just have to buy into the premise.
|
You aren't getting this. Drop this part.
quote:
quote:
What about the minorities? Are they just screwed? |
Who says the minorities can't be the power brokers?  After all, look at South Africa for the longest time.
But, realistically, minorities without power are screwed in terms of rights and have been since time immemorial. They are extended rights when the people in power feel moral guilt at the way those minorities are treated.
|
And this fits you prefered ethical model, and why? You seem more of a utilitarian too me.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Imran Siddiqui
|
 |
The Potterverse
Jan 1970
time: 00:22
|
|
quote:
That's why I'm asking you about real world problems. If there are no real world problems regarding this special case than who cares about it. |
Well I think there would always be real world problems in where looking at the minimum isn't the best idea (at least IMO). Things that would be affected are taxes and welfare (if we look at the least advantaged member, we want them to make much more than they do right now on welfare, and we'd want those who make more than the mean pay for them). That, I guess, would be the beginning.
quote:
And this fits you prefered ethical model, and why? |
Because all this talk about 'natural' rights, I find silly. I don't think they exist, and I think power is really the only basis for them. Though I do agree there needs to be rights, I think the basis are through humanity. And I think it is in people's interests to curtail individual political power through its right-making authority.
I wouldn't say I'm totally a utilitarian, though I do have some of those tendancies. For instance, I believe strongly in freedom of speech, even if it hurts more people than it helps (like when the Klan wants to march), because I believe that power severly curtails the political power of those who are on top in the government.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Monopolies are of course inconsistent with a free market. How could a monopoly be consistent with a free market? |
Maybe because they can come about in a free market? It seems you have a rather poor understanding of economics. A market for all goods and services simply cannot always function in perfect equilibrium. There are frequently natural barriers to entry, first-mover advantages, changing elasticities of demand and supply, etc. all of which can lead to a monopoly. Monopolies can form and disappear quite apart from government regulation. Hell, it's even common sense - the first person who brings a new product to market has a monopoly. It doesn't mean it's going to stay that way.
quote:
My quote supports my definition of a free market, that the law of supply and demand hold sway. Freedom from laws and ordinances is just a logical extension of this. However, even the neoclassicists realised that regulations were a small price to pay to keep a market free of monopoly (or a cartel). |
A) You're definition of a free market is wrong.
B) It supports no such thing. It mearly addresses the optimal point of perfect competition. And your last sentence supports my point exactly. You may see the benefit of regulating a market to prevent possible abuses (as do I), but once you start regulating it, it's no longer a genuine free market. It pretty much defies logic to even suggest that you could have government regulation in a perfectly free market.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Natalinasmpf
|
|
quote:
When you go visit the middle east and convert to Islam and live the way they do then you come talk to me and tell me they are not morally inferior. |
I wonder if I should kill you, be shocked, be amazed, or laugh at the fact you think all Muslims live in the Middle East.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MalevolentLight
|
|
High Above
Jul 1999
time: 00:22
|
|
I'm well aware Muslims not only live in the Middle East but have infested other areas including Malaysia, Phillipines, US, Africa, and just about every single other country out there.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Natalinasmpf
|
|
quote:
I'm well aware Muslims not only live in the Middle East but have infested other areas including Malaysia, Phillipines, US, Africa, and just about every single other country out there. |
Then why do you try to symbolise the life of a person devoted Islam by referring to Saudi Arabia? You would then be well aware that a Muslim living in Singapore (and why the heck did you mention Malaysia and not us?! We have more GDP then them) has a vastly different lifestyle from one living in Saudi Arabia?
Athiests has also infested the likes of everywhere.
Nietszche 
quote:
Take a look at all the problems in the world right now. Everything from Russia to Africa to Southeast Asia to the US, every problem can be attributed to Muslim extremism. The fact that there are so few groups to counter it is nothing more than compliance by the Muslim community. They've declared a Jihad on us, |
Not really. Even if the supposedly (Muslim-run? hardly) OPEC cartel got dissolved and oil was everywhere, it wouldn't solve pollution, or energy. Sure, it would make energy cheaper, but it wouldn't solve its deficit.
Don't forget, a lot of problems are also solved by Islam. Many Arab inventors invented because in order to explore their relationship with Allah: Algebra, Calculus, mathematical concepts....
I could say, all the world problems right now can be attributed to American Imperialism, blatant oppression, capitalism and plutocracy, and the creeping Orwellianism and denial of rights found in Guantanamo Bay. Hypocrisy. Human rights violations. Ruthless suppression of dissent. Massacres. Unnecessary civilian casualties. Dropping depleted Uranium shells in civilian water supplies.
Its not that Islam is at fault....the evil US Imperialists are at cause. Islam is only provided a justification REACTION against the oppressive US Imperialism. Worldwide revolutionary Jihad against decadence and imperialism. 
Last edited by Natalinasmpf on 29-09-2004 at 22:00
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MalevolentLight
|
|
High Above
Jul 1999
time: 00:22
|
|
I don't see you speaking out against Islamic extremism or starting protests or anything of the sort. If you go along with it you are compliant and therefore no better than they are. While there are some good muslims out there they are few and far between and they never speak out or start protests against Islamic extremism. Everytime I see people cheering a beheading I can't help but think to myself "Why don't we just wipe out these animals?". Iraq is really the easiest country of all to liberate and look at the trouble we are having. Imagine trying to change a place like Saudi Arabia and change the mindset of the animals that inhabit there? I just don't ever see it happening and as more and more terrorist attacks happen I have to question why we are being so patient with a people that are out to kill us and impose their barbaric ways on the world.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Kidicious
|
|
Diety of Kidiverse
Mar 2003
time: 21:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
quote:
That's why I'm asking you about real world problems. If there are no real world problems regarding this special case than who cares about it. |
Well I think there would always be real world problems in where looking at the minimum isn't the best idea (at least IMO). Things that would be affected are taxes and welfare (if we look at the least advantaged member, we want them to make much more than they do right now on welfare, and we'd want those who make more than the mean pay for them). That, I guess, would be the beginning.
|
Come on Imran. Don't make this hard. Give me a policy that would give a small benefit to 99% and charge 1% a small amount. Tell me why the Theory of Justice would reject it.
quote:
quote:
And this fits you prefered ethical model, and why? |
Because all this talk about 'natural' rights, I find silly. I don't think they exist, and I think power is really the only basis for them. Though I do agree there needs to be rights, I think the basis are through humanity. And I think it is in people's interests to curtail individual political power through its right-making authority.
I wouldn't say I'm totally a utilitarian, though I do have some of those tendancies. For instance, I believe strongly in freedom of speech, even if it hurts more people than it helps (like when the Klan wants to march), because I believe that power severly curtails the political power of those who are on top in the government. |
Let me go back, because trying to get a fix on your ethics seems impossible. Although, I'm starting to see that Agathon was right. you are really just a conservative. I don't even think that's an ethical model though.
You said that the minorities are screwed in a system where the powerfull get to determine which rights people will have, but that the powerfull sometimes feel guilty and grant the minorities rights. When the powerfull do so, aren't they just doing what the Rawlsian model suggests?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
MalevolentLight
|
|
High Above
Jul 1999
time: 00:22
|
|
quote:
Not really. Even if the supposedly (Muslim-run? hardly) OPEC cartel got dissolved and oil was everywhere, it wouldn't solve pollution, or energy. Sure, it would make energy cheaper, but it wouldn't solve its deficit.
Don't forget, a lot of problems are also solved by Islam. Many Arab inventors invented because in order to explore their relationship with Allah: Algebra, Calculus, mathematical concepts....
I could say, all the world problems right now can be attributed to American Imperialism, blatant oppression, capitalism and plutocracy, and the creeping Orwellianism and denial of rights found in Guantanamo Bay. Hypocrisy. Human rights violations. Ruthless suppression of dissent. Massacres. Unnecessary civilian casualties. Dropping depleted Uranium shells in civilian water supplies.
Its not that Islam is at fault....the evil US Imperialists are at cause. Islam is only provided a justification REACTION against the oppressive US Imperialism. Worldwide revolutionary Jihad against decadence and imperialism. |
You threatened to kill me in one of your posts, thank you for proving my point. The fact is the Islamic world hasn't contributed anything other than oil in the past 300 years. You are a relic even more so than Europe. Your countries are some of the poorest in the world and rather than taking responsibility for your own shortcomings you blame it all on the West and the Imperialist US devil.
As for Guantanamo Bay, they are eating the same stuff our troops are. Our treatment of terrorists is far better than your treatment of us. You chop off heads, we simply throw you in a cage where you belong. I love your last line there, it pretty much sums up the problem with the Islamic scum. You want a Jihad with us, come and get it. While you maybe be able to shoot some kids in the back while they run, we have the power to wipe your entire people off the face of the earth. How's that for Jihad?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Natalinasmpf
|
|
quote:
I don't see you speaking out against Islamic extremism or starting protests or anything of the sort. If you go along with it you are compliant and therefore no better than they are. While there are some good muslims out there they are few and far between and they never speak out or start protests against Islamic extremism. Everytime I see people cheering a beheading I can't help but think to myself "Why don't we just wipe out these animals?". Iraq is really the easiest country of all to liberate and look at the trouble we are having. Imagine trying to change a place like Saudi Arabia and change the mindset of the animals that inhabit there? I just don't ever see it happening and as more and more terrorist attacks happen I have to question why we are being so patient with a people that are out to kill us and impose their barbaric ways on the world. |
"Few and far between?"
I beg to differ. In case you didn't know, they do stage protests against extremism. Before going ahead and generalising again, you should lose some ignorance - have you seen the religious messages inside the mosques here? The Muslims here actively campaign against the extreme violence of the terrorists who campaign in the name of their religion....
Get out of the well, you frog. 
I don't approve of the terrorist actions, but I am rather sympathetic to them, because such actions are mere expected reactions to blatant US Imperialism. If people in the name of Islam have done "x units" much terrible things, I think the US has done ten times as much such terrible things in the name of "freedom and democracy".
Everytime I see US inhabitants who frequently diss other countries, arrogantly boast of how they'd whip or crudely refer to other countries, I can't help think why the UN doesn't expel the US from the General Assembly. By now with the World Wars, we should know nationalism brings disaster. Why are we being so patient with a country and system that only seeks to bring oppression, violence, disaster and hatred and ignorance upon the world?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Natalinasmpf
|
|
quote:
You threatened to kill me in one of your posts, thank you for proving my point. |
Uh, that was half-serious, mostly cynical and sarcastic.
quote:
Your countries are some of the poorest in the world |
My country is one of the poorest in the world? I beg your pardon? Come out of your tortoise shell: Singapore is a FIRST WORLD COUNTRY.
We have a relatively high GDP per capita, slightly above the US. How can you even SAY one of the poorest in the world?
quote:
Your countries are some of the poorest in the world and rather than taking responsibility for your own shortcomings you blame it all on the West and the Imperialist US devil.
|
Not apologising for my own shortcomings does not eliminate the immense shortcomings of the US. Yes, we have shortcomings. I know which ones are from ourselves, and which are from the US. I know we are slightly authoritarian. I am not proud of that. However, looking at history, like selling weapons to governments of questionable nature, funding Fascist states, funding coups, funding contra-terrorism, supporting Reagan...a country whose elections are mostly influenced by large scale corporations, a country which has plunged into moral degeneration, a country which seeks to insinuate Orwellianism by justifiying it as a measure in the war on terror....
A strong Islamic reaction should be of no surprise in such cases.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Natalinasmpf
|
|
quote:
The idea of a God is a simple tool of the bourgeoisie. You aren't making any sense.
|
I am. The idea of God can be abused by the bourgeoisie to stay in power.
Drugs can be used to benefit health, it can be also be used to destroy health....if used wrongly. If people have worship God like they should (and if they don't, don't use him at all) - there would be no detriments, no would there?
(In the bible, God doesn't treat abuse of his name - blasphemy, lightly either. For example, if the bourgeoise says, pay us this much, or accept these wages, don't complain, because God says not to when conditions are already bad, then they will be punished.)
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22.
Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
29-09-2004 20:49
I remember having scores of around -7 last time.
|