Dunce Americans

Hugh

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 01:34:39 UTC Post #178486

For Seventh:

As for the disabled. Let's take an example. He's rather famous, actually, and is very highly regarded internationally across the large majority of society. Ohhhh, but he's disabled, so surely he's of less use to society than "normal people"?

No, because he's not mentally disabled... and he's rich.

Bring out the death penalty for all crimes?

No, replace life in prison with the death penalty so you have to pay for a syringe/whatever-chemicals-they-use instead of 40+ years of food/health care for some guy who's not getting out anyway.

For Xyos:

Its a work of fantasy, of fiction!

So ideas from fictional works can't be thought-provoking or true?

These philosophers sat all day contemplating these thoughts and beliefs.

I could sit around all day and think 2+2 = 5 (in base 10) and I'd still be wrong. Just because you think about something a lot doesn't make any it truer. You say yourself "these thoughts and beliefs" as if thoughts/beliefs are more valid than any other.

Hugh

J3r3my

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 02:30:47 UTC Post #178488

So welfare systems aren't perfect, and people lie and steal from them. The world isn't perfect. Get off your bizarre isolationist utopian cloud and pay attention to the real world.

Q.E.D., pigfuckers.

When I said we should get rid of welfare I mean that we should deny freeloaders access to it. Im not saying we let the poor starve...Im saying let the freeloaders who dont want to work starve. They get free money while everyone else works their asses off to get it. Not only that but alot of these freeloaders never go to school or drop out and turn to a life of crime. If someone comes from a poor family then pay for them to go through school and help them get a job. If theyre handicapped and cant work then by all means support them.

If theyre able to work and refuse, they dont deserve any free money.

J3r3my

Seventh-Monkey

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 02:47:45 UTC Post #178490

So how exactly are do you plan to seperate the needy from the lazy, genius? The system isn't intended to "give free money" the lazy.

Open-mindedness can only be achieved by giving all sides of an issue equal validity.

I'm guessing you mean "consideration"?

Seventh-MonkeyPretty nifty

Jobabob

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 03:21:22 UTC Post #178499

So ideas from fictional works can't be thought-provoking or true?

Of course they can, look at the bible

zing

Jobabob

Seventh-Monkey

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 04:10:57 UTC Post #178503

Played!

Seventh-MonkeyPretty nifty

Hugh

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 04:45:42 UTC Post #178508

Yes, you really played Buddhist 'ol me...

Hugh

Xyos212

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 09:20:59 UTC Post #178532

nickleplate, Hugh: Your missing the point here. One can find the Matrix storyline interesting and fun to think about, but dont take it as a serious philosophy meant to guide your beliefs. Thats pretty much what Hugh was saying. Thats wrong. Anyway the analogies and philosophy addressed in the Matrix only barely touches on the philosophy it was based on. I know Hugh has not read any such books because he used the matrix as an example. A fictional story.

Xyos212

ZombieLoffe

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 09:59:07 UTC Post #178533

What? Philosophies are just ways of thinking - one could follow Calvin & Hobbes as a personal spiritual guide if he wants to. One book being more famous or deep than the other doesn't make it more valid. You could make as good of a point in a fictional story as any fact schoolbook you can find. Allegories such as Animal Farm are quite thoughtprovoking and critical, yet fictional.

I've never read a single book about philosophy in my entire life, yet I have a quite firm set of beliefs concerning both society and life itself. Am I... wrong?

ZombieLoffe

Dorian27

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 10:27:24 UTC Post #178535

I'd rather follow Rousseau and Hobbes.

and yes, you are wrong. =P

The fact that you haven't studied philosophy doesn't make you wrong, it makes you ignorant (not an insult) you haven't been exposed to other possible thoughts, which kind of limits your potential to make an educated decision. (also, not an insult, don't take it that way)

I hope this is relevent. I haven't been following this thread entirely.. meh, nothing is relevent in this thread anyway.

Dorian27

Xyos212

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 10:33:54 UTC Post #178538

It might be a pointless thread, but its damn fun to argue about it!

ZL: These philosophical beliefs made in the past have been the basis for law, how to live ones life, government, etc everywhere around the world! Their influence cant be ignored. I just think you dont want to read their works, so you (And people like you) create their own weak empty beliefs concieved in an hours thinking compared to a lifetime of beliefs. I know philosophy is a very hard read and hard to get the jist of, but give it a chance before you go say its bad and not needed.

Xyos212

ZombieLoffe

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 11:37:24 UTC Post #178551

I never said it was bad or not needed, or that you should ignore it. I said everyone has their own beliefs, and they're just as correct as any other philosopher's.

If our society today is based on said philosophies, then hasn't everyone been influenced, one way or the other, by them? Reading a book about how life is when you're already there seems quite futile. Yes, it may expand your view to the beliefs of others, but so can actually talking to people or listen to today's politics.
You can't learn everything from reading a book, nor are there things you can only learn from reading a book.

Also, what makes one belief more weak and empty than the other? I mean, it's ludicrous to believe that someone isn't as morally sound or intelligent just because they decide to go by their own beliefs than those of a 2000 year old librarian.

ZombieLoffe

Xyos212

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 11:50:38 UTC Post #178554

I understand what you mean ZL, but the books I mentioned go deeper into beliefs held now, (and some not realized). It helps people get a sense of society and how everything works off eachother. Sometimes it helps with personal questions an individual never knew needed answering. Im not saying theirs is a better belief than someone else, but simply pointing out that their entire lives revolved around them thinking this up. Compared to random people creating their beliefs as they go. Not only does it give a sense of what philosophy is when reading it, but also helps guide an individual with their character and outlook on the world. It teaches to think outside the box, see the world as something else, etc. I cant really summerize it in a paragraph.

Xyos212

nickelplate

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 11:50:52 UTC Post #178555

Xyos: I see what you're saying, BUT just because it's the STORY is fictional, doesn't mean there can't be a lot of things in it that are true. I Watched a movie about the Battle of Gettysburg in the American Civil War. It was historical FICTION, yet that battle still happened and many of the people in the movie existed back then. Many quotes taken from real civil war generals etc. Just because something is in the fiction section in a bookstore doesn't make EVERYTHING about it completely false. Because Philosophy books are in the "fiction section" at america's largest bookseller, barnes and Noble.

Man cannot learn by books alone, but by life experience.

nickelplate

Xyos212

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 12:20:38 UTC Post #178561

The difference between the Matrix and your Civil war movie is that that civil war movie is based on actual historical events. The maxrix is not. Opinion's and beliefs should not be made from movies only meant to entertain with a futuristic plot.

Yes the matrix had alot of truths and lessons in it. My point was that Hugh took the one that was made by an insane machine not meant to be considered at all.

Xyos212

Jobabob

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 12:55:30 UTC Post #178567

Yes the matrix had alot of truths and lessons in it

Quit while you are ahead

Jobabob

rowleybob

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 13:04:27 UTC Post #178571

> Wake up Jobabob.
> The Matrix has your shit...

rowleybob

LeFtY

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 14:16:42 UTC Post #178580

So how exactly are do you plan to seperate the needy from the lazy, genius? The system isn't intended to "give free money" the lazy.

In Australia we have work for welfare programs, but it?s not compulsory.

We are also implementing a welfare card system where people can't buy smokes, booze or gamble, only food and clothing items can be purchased, I am a little sceptical about this as you could purchase cloths with the card and return them to the store and get cash back unless the docket quotes the card number.
:

The reason behind this is that allot of people on welfare are abusing the system and don?t spend the money on the family (kids), sometimes they have no food and no electricity because they have blown the cash, Not everyone abuses it but those that do tarnish the real needy, like it or not, welfare is needed in the community, the authorities need to be more vigilant on finding the welfare abusers.

LeFtY

Seventh-Monkey

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 16:53:55 UTC Post #178593

Very interesting. I definitely agree with the gambling thing. I think. Interesting, regardless.

Seventh-MonkeyPretty nifty

Hugh

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 17:06:15 UTC Post #178594

You can only buy food with your food stamps here (hence the name, I suppose) which is all fine and dandy except for, yes, the people who abuse the system. Strangely, my history class was all about the welfare system today. One guy was saying that people buy their food with the food stamps and then pull out a wad of cash (amount unspecified) and buy their ciggies/lottery tickets, and he felt that they should have to choose between ciggies/food, aaaaaand I agree. Blah.

Hugh

nickelplate

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-05 22:29:21 UTC Post #178609

I used to work for a grocery store. People could use thier "food stamp card" to buy ANYTHING at the grocery store. Cigs beer lotto charcoal briquettes. anything.

nickelplate

LeFtY

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 07:26:48 UTC Post #178661

Some store owners are as bad as the welfare cheats, they don?t care about the system as long as they make a sale $$$$.

From a tax payers point of view, these type of people should be fined if caught helping these cheats because they are profiting from a crime (fraud), I paid close to $60.000 AU dollars in tax last financial year, I don?t mind if the money is used correctly, but if people abuse the system I get pissed off as I could have used this cash for more important things like Booze, Smokes and lotto tickets

, at least its my own money I am spending.

LeFtY

Elon Yariv

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 13:33:40 UTC Post #178701

It started as a thread about american dunces but now it's just american dunces.

Come on only 324 posts to beat Hostage situation's record. We can do it!

Elon Yariv

nickelplate

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 15:57:06 UTC Post #178724

Really, the whole point of this thread has turned out to be that you can't have a system set up without corruption and people taking advantage of it. and as soon as you set up a system to prevent THAT, the people in that new system become corrupt.

Another point would be that you can't be on ANY part of the political continuum and not be a hypocrite unless you're square in the middle. Seriously... RIght-wingers protest abortions and want criminal executions, and Lefties protest criminal executions and want abortions. WTH? how is EITHER side not a hypocrite with this crap. Unless you want ALL killing or NO killing, you're a hypocrite.

It's unavoidable: things are going to be screwed up no matter what. Because even if ONE person out of the whole world's population does not follow the laws, everyone will pay somehow.

nickelplate

Elon Yariv

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 16:02:18 UTC Post #178726

Then this person must be hanged.

Elon Yariv

LeFtY

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 16:08:59 UTC Post #178727

and Lefties protest criminal executions and want abortions. WTH?

was there a subliminal message in that statement ?

LeFtY

nickelplate

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 17:55:16 UTC Post #178744

Then this person must be hanged.

Sorry, either anyone can kill anyone, or nobody can kill anyone.

haha, no lefty... unless you DO that.

nickelplate

ZombieLoffe

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 17:59:04 UTC Post #178746

Foeti can't really think, anyway. Pro-abortion ftw.

ZombieLoffe

Seventh-Monkey

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 18:05:36 UTC Post #178751

Foetus -> foetuses
Genius -> genii
Radius -> radii
Foetius -> foetii

Seventh-MonkeyPretty nifty

Kasperg

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 18:12:46 UTC Post #178752

Foeti can't really think

Not if you kill them before they have the chance, that is. Abortion is murder, unless there's a magical number of cells that have to be reached before being considered a human being with human rights...

Kasperg

Seventh-Monkey

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 18:15:21 UTC Post #178753

Of course there is. You consider a just-fertilised egg to have the same rights as a grown human?

Seventh-MonkeyPretty nifty

Kasperg

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 18:24:11 UTC Post #178754

It is basically a human, so maybe it has only the very basic rights like... the right to live?
Do children and aged people have different basic rights?
Edit: a just-fertilised egg has the potential to become a full-grown human, so they are the same thing at different stages.

Kasperg

ZombieLoffe

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 18:30:05 UTC Post #178755

Sperm has the potential to grow to beocme humans. So people who masturbate are murderers?
A foetus (foeti, proper plural) does not have the same rights as a grown human.

ZombieLoffe

Kasperg

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 18:36:18 UTC Post #178757

How does sperm grow to become a human? They need egg cells. And egg cells need sperm. I though everyone knew that!

What is a grown human?
My cousin was born after roughly 8 months in gestation. Do we have to wait one month to consider her a person? How does that work?

Edit: I guess I have the delete all my RMFs because they aren't full-grown maps, damn!

Kasperg

ZombieLoffe

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 19:09:10 UTC Post #178761

That's a pretty senseless analogy. What about the rights of the un-wanting mother? Doesn't she have the right to choose? Isn't it better to remove the foetus when it's still a foetus, instead of when it's a born baby?

ZombieLoffe

Kasperg

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 19:30:37 UTC Post #178765

How about giving it in adoption to some wanting mother? That's much more sensible in my opinion. And unless there's been a rape or health problems with the mother, I don't think she has the right to choose. You freedom stops where the freedom of another one begins.
Of course, she has the right to choose not to get pregnant in the first place. It seems people make their choices too late.
Abortion is the irresponsible reaction to the irresponsible action of getting pregnant in the wrong situation. There are exceptions, of course.

Kasperg

Xyos212

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 19:32:46 UTC Post #178766

Sperm+egg=human H=S+e

If this topic is done debate, I have another one:

Individual scholarships and special treatment for blacks in entrance to college and the workplace. Basicly your race gives you benefits over everyone else.

Good or bad?

Xyos212

Orpheus

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 19:34:03 UTC Post #178767

Orpheus

Kasperg

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 19:41:13 UTC Post #178768

Good if it helps them be on par with the rest of the students. Bad if it gives them too much advantage. That would be racist.
The same things happens with the concept of parity. For example, some enterprises want to have the same number of men and women in the important positions. I think it would be wrong to give the job to a woman if there's a better qualified man for the job, and to give the job to a man if there's a woman who could do better. If parity was a reality, no rules about it would be needed.

Kasperg

Jobabob

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 20:07:32 UTC Post #178769

Very few eneterprises I know have parity laws related to sexuality, but I dont see whats so bad about ensuring an organisation is not sexist.

Jobabob

Kasperg

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 20:18:42 UTC Post #178772

It is bad if the objective of that enterprise depends on the efficiency, intelligence etc of the individuals, not in the fact that they are men or women.
If a woman needs her government to be composed of 10 male ministers and 10 female ministers (as it happens in my country) to feel represented, that means she does not feel men represent her, and does not feel equal to them.

Edit: [quote]anyone who has a viewpoint on abortion and has never lost, nor conceived a child has no opinion worth listening to.[/quote] You mean that unless someone has suffered the horrors of war, his opinion against it is not valid?

Kasperg

Orpheus

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 21:04:23 UTC Post #178776

Orpheus

inuendocrash

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-06 22:39:25 UTC Post #178784

War is bad? If you look at it at the individual level, it appears bad, nobody wants to go to war, if you look at it on a national level, it appears good by stimulating the economy. WWII ended the great deppression much better than FDR because of all the jobs required. It advances technology, which is than converted to civilian life in gadgets such as this, the internet. No better solution to overpopulation. die for a cause. Lets gather the deppressed emo kids, send them off to war, and instead of them killing themselves they'll kill each other. Words are not better than violance, and violance is not better than words. Words can hurt more than a punch, arguments can last forever (this thread), where as a fight lasts until one group is left standing

inuendocrash

Guinea Pirate

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-07 00:18:39 UTC Post #178794

Q.E.D., pigfuckers.

I really don't give a shit whether you eat, fornicate with, or are allergic to pigs.

I'm glad you clarified the point about change sometimes being good. Quite profound.

Also, "mudslinging" is a stupid term. There's a proper logical term. You should know it, of all people.

Ad hominem - Latin for against the man. It is an attack on the person(s) rather than the argument or issue at hand. Also known as character assasination, it is a logical fallacy that renders one's argument invalid. One will often to resort to this if they feel their argument is too weak to persuade people by itself.

So, in a sense, calling our fellow debaters "pigfuckers" is an example of ad hominem. All I have to say is shame on you, Seventh. You of all people should know better.

Guinea Pirate

Kasperg

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-07 03:56:30 UTC Post #178806

Is that the real point you wanted to make? or were you just talking to hear your own damned voice?

I wasn't trying to make a real point, but you were, by saying that people can't have opinions on something like abortion unless they live through it first hand:

anyone who has a viewpoint on abortion and has never lost, nor conceived a child has no opinion worth listening to.

...

@inuendocrash: war does indeed stimulate the economy of a country, but it can as well deplete its resources and result in the loss of the main working population. We have videogames thanks to the A-bomb project, but go tell the mother of a dead soldier that his death was a small price to pay so you could have cheaper gas and Internet... I would find that hard to do

I hope the technological advances result in less side-effects and innocent deaths in future conflicts... [Shrek voice]Like that's ever gonna happen![/Shrek voice]

Kasperg

Jobabob

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-07 03:58:20 UTC Post #178807

No one thinks war is a good thing so, you can pretty much assume that war is bad.

bush, zing

there is such a thing as a 'just' war, albiet I dont think democracyfying a country is a just reason, it all depends on how you define war though. Engaging the axis in the world wars was obviously necessary and the outcome of it was positive compared to what could have happened otherwise.

Jobabob

Elon Yariv

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-07 04:18:42 UTC Post #178812

What would have happened otherwise?

Elon Yariv

Seventh-Monkey

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-07 04:27:29 UTC Post #178815

Ad hominem - Latin for against the man. It is an attack on the person(s) rather than the argument or issue at hand. Also known as character assasination, it is a logical fallacy that renders one's argument invalid. One will often to resort to this if they feel their argument is too weak to persuade people by itself.

So, in a sense, calling our fellow debaters "pigfuckers" is an example of ad hominem. All I have to say is shame on you, Seventh. You of all people should know better.

Er, the random insult and argument were clearly seperated. I didn't use it as the basis of any points of argument, so it's not ad hominem. That is the term I wanted, though.

Seventh-MonkeyPretty nifty

Orpheus

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-07 07:51:43 UTC Post #178830

Orpheus

Kasperg

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-07 08:54:51 UTC Post #178839

I wasn't comparing anything, it was just an example that came to my mind. I'm sorry if you misinterpreted it. What I was trying to say is that it's very easy to put off people saying they can't have worthy opinions in things they haven't lived through.
By the way, apples and oranges are both fruit

Kasperg

inuendocrash

Posted 18 years ago2006-05-07 09:00:27 UTC Post #178842

Elon, otherwise i would be dead (im Jewish)

inuendocrash

Dunce Americans Created 18 years ago2006-04-08 11:58:23 UTC by satchmo