Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   On feeling sorry for people
Tusko
Member (Idle past 101 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 286 of 300 (343257)
08-25-2006 9:54 AM
Reply to: Message 284 by ReverendDG
08-25-2006 1:11 AM


I hoped someone would like that one!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by ReverendDG, posted 08-25-2006 1:11 AM ReverendDG has not replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 287 of 300 (343358)
08-25-2006 2:02 PM


inconsistency in Jar's argument
I think an impartial reader would see the following as criticism, either in or out of context of his other remarks in that post:
You claim that your "heart went out to them", yet you didn't do squat about it. Did you ask one of the staff if there were any that would enjoy a conversation? We already know you did not try to talk to any of them.
He denied that this was criticism. All he was saying, he said, was that I had missed a "golden opportunity." That, he says, is not criticism.
When pressed on this point through numerous threads by Neurocycle, we start seeing another theme emerging:
Sure I disagree with robin about almost everything. As to what he did, he brought it up in a thread. It was not something solicited, but volunteered. He continues to bring them up. These threads are not started by others, but by robin. If he simply wants to speak, without anyone responding, then he can so indicate in the opening post and one of the admins will happily close the thread for him as soon as they see it.
But when he brings these things up time after time, I assume, perhaps wrongly, that he is seeking a response.
All I did was present an alternative series of actions. I believe this is a discussion board. When someone starts a thread usually it is to discuss the contents of the opening post.
We got it the first time he started a "Poor Robin" thread and we get it this time.
Why? Does robin want us to be honest or just to reinforce his position? Does he want us to be PC?
The idea that emerges here in these last few remarks can be summed up as follows: If Robin doesn't want to be criticized, what did he start the thread for? Does he just want everyone to agree with him?
I think an impartial reader will agree that this will not do. I (with the help of Neurocycle) wanted Jar to admit that he was criticizing me for not talking to the Vets. He has steadfastly refused to admit it. And then in these passages I've quoted he starts insinuating that I shouldn't complain about being criticized if I start a thread on the subject.
I was just wanted him to admit that he was criticizing me, and then I wanted him to say why--that it violated, as I understand it, his moral code (presumably).
But Jar doesn't care for the word "moral." It sounds too judgmental to him. So he subsititutes instead the word "right."
In explaining his ideas, he says:
You don't try to be moral, you just try to do what is right.
I think that "being moral" consists of doing "what is right."
Jar wants to criticize me, in regard to the veterans, but he doesn't want to say he is criticizing me, because that would seem to be violating another rule he has vaguely in his mind about "not judging."
His comments are very inconsistent.
Edited by robinrohan, : No reason given.
Edited by robinrohan, : typos

Replies to this message:
 Message 288 by jar, posted 08-25-2006 2:33 PM robinrohan has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 288 of 300 (343366)
08-25-2006 2:33 PM
Reply to: Message 287 by robinrohan
08-25-2006 2:02 PM


Re: inconsistency in Jar's argument
Jar wants to criticize me, in regard to the veterans, but he doesn't want to say he is criticizing me, because that would seem to be violating another rule he has vaguely in his mind about "not judging."
And where do you get the idea that I some rule about not judging?
This just keeps getting funnier.
What I have said is the moral systems are societal or personal. As long as your moral system does not negatively impact me then it is none of my business. Society will have some other set of morals and the society will enforce those for all.
But we all judge. Judging is part of life. I just don't judge other folks personal moral set unless it somehow has a negative affect that I see as big enough to make me take some action.
As to the morality of what you did at the VA hospital, why would I even care if it was moral or not? Honestly I really don't care if it was moral or immoral, it was just a great opportunity you missed. Your loss. That's about it.
Wanna sing another verse of Poor Little Petunia?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by robinrohan, posted 08-25-2006 2:02 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 289 by robinrohan, posted 08-25-2006 2:42 PM jar has replied
 Message 299 by purpledawn, posted 08-26-2006 2:26 AM jar has not replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 289 of 300 (343369)
08-25-2006 2:42 PM
Reply to: Message 288 by jar
08-25-2006 2:33 PM


Re: inconsistency in Jar's argument
But we all judge. Judging is part of life.
Here's another inconsistency. You claim that your code is personal and applies only to you. But if that was the case, you wouldn't be able to judge anybody ever in a moral sense, because your rules would apply only to you.
So your code is not just personal.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by jar, posted 08-25-2006 2:33 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 290 by jar, posted 08-25-2006 3:47 PM robinrohan has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 290 of 300 (343377)
08-25-2006 3:47 PM
Reply to: Message 289 by robinrohan
08-25-2006 2:42 PM


Here is the next verse
it's the same as the last verse.
Robin quotemines this statement:
But we all judge. Judging is part of life.
And then goes one to assert:
quote:
Here's another inconsistency. You claim that your code is personal and applies only to you. But if that was the case, you wouldn't be able to judge anybody ever in a moral sense, because your rules would apply only to you.
So your code is not just personal.
What I actually said in Message 288 was:
And where do you get the idea that I some rule about not judging?
This just keeps getting funnier.
What I have said is the moral systems are societal or personal. As long as your moral system does not negatively impact me then it is none of my business. Society will have some other set of morals and the society will enforce those for all.
But we all judge. Judging is part of life. I just don't judge other folks personal moral set unless it somehow has a negative affect that I see as big enough to make me take some action.
As to the morality of what you did at the VA hospital, why would I even care if it was moral or not? Honestly I really don't care if it was moral or immoral, it was just a great opportunity you missed. Your loss. That's about it.
Wanna sing another verse of Poor Little Petunia?
Your tale about your trip to the VA Hospital had othing to do with morals. All I said was that you missed a great opportunity. I have never expressed a position on whether it was moral or immoral. I really don't even care.
You are wrong though in saying that just because morals might be personal I cannot judge someone elses morals. Of course I can. I can't really imagine where it might come up unless something in the other persons moral system negatively impacted me.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by robinrohan, posted 08-25-2006 2:42 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 291 by robinrohan, posted 08-25-2006 8:40 PM jar has replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 291 of 300 (343426)
08-25-2006 8:40 PM
Reply to: Message 290 by jar
08-25-2006 3:47 PM


Re: Here is the next verse
You are wrong though in saying that just because morals might be personal I cannot judge someone elses morals. Of course I can
That's not what you said before. You said this:
Robin, that is my moral code™, something I have to live with. I do not and TTBOMK have not said, that anyone else should live by my moral code™. They can't. They are not me. You can no more be me than I could be you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by jar, posted 08-25-2006 3:47 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by jar, posted 08-25-2006 8:55 PM robinrohan has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 292 of 300 (343429)
08-25-2006 8:55 PM
Reply to: Message 291 by robinrohan
08-25-2006 8:40 PM


Re: Here is the next verse
Sorry robin but I still don't see the conflict. Where is there any conflict between those two statements? Of course I can judge someone elses morals. But I also don't expect them to live by my moral code™.
And what is it with you quotemining without providing the links to the posts where they originate? What is your need to hide the content and context of what folk say?
How come you do not include links or even the rest of the piece you did quotemine?
For example in Message 290 I said:
You are wrong though in saying that just because morals might be personal I cannot judge someone elses morals. Of course I can. {next section left out by Robin} I can't really imagine where it might come up unless something in the other persons moral system negatively impacted me.
And where do you get the idea that I some rule about not judging?
This just keeps getting funnier.
What I have said is the moral systems are societal or personal. As long as your moral system does not negatively impact me then it is none of my business. Society will have some other set of morals and the society will enforce those for all.
But we all judge. Judging is part of life. I just don't judge other folks personal moral set unless it somehow has a negative affect that I see as big enough to make me take some action.
As to the morality of what you did at the VA hospital, why would I even care if it was moral or not? Honestly I really don't care if it was moral or immoral, it was just a great opportunity you missed. Your loss. That's about it.
Wanna sing another verse of Poor Little Petunia?
That goes into some detail of when I would judge someones morals. That is entirely different than my expecting them to live by my morals.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by robinrohan, posted 08-25-2006 8:40 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 293 by robinrohan, posted 08-25-2006 11:07 PM jar has replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 293 of 300 (343455)
08-25-2006 11:07 PM
Reply to: Message 292 by jar
08-25-2006 8:55 PM


Re: Here is the next verse
Sorry robin but I still don't see the conflict. Where is there any conflict between those two statements? Of course I can judge someone elses morals. But I also don't expect them to live by my moral code™.
If you judge them, then you are saying they ought to live by your moral code. It's not about "expecting." It's about judging them for not living up to your moral rules.
You are saying, "This person violated my moral rules."
We all do this.
I also have my moral code. And you have violated one of my most important rules.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by jar, posted 08-25-2006 8:55 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by jar, posted 08-25-2006 11:12 PM robinrohan has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 294 of 300 (343458)
08-25-2006 11:12 PM
Reply to: Message 293 by robinrohan
08-25-2006 11:07 PM


Re: Here is the next verse
Still quotemining I see.
If anyone is still reading this thread you can Message 292 for the context of the snippet Robin quoted and all the additional material he left out.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by robinrohan, posted 08-25-2006 11:07 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by robinrohan, posted 08-25-2006 11:47 PM jar has replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 295 of 300 (343462)
08-25-2006 11:47 PM
Reply to: Message 294 by jar
08-25-2006 11:12 PM


Re: Here is the next verse
Still quotemining I see.
I don't think I've done that, but you are guilty of a GRAVE SIN:
You are guilty of intellectual dishonesty.
Edited by robinrohan, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 294 by jar, posted 08-25-2006 11:12 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by jar, posted 08-25-2006 11:49 PM robinrohan has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 296 of 300 (343463)
08-25-2006 11:49 PM
Reply to: Message 295 by robinrohan
08-25-2006 11:47 PM


Re: Here is the next verse
Okay.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by robinrohan, posted 08-25-2006 11:47 PM robinrohan has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 297 by robinrohan, posted 08-26-2006 12:25 AM jar has not replied

robinrohan
Inactive Member


Message 297 of 300 (343470)
08-26-2006 12:25 AM
Reply to: Message 296 by jar
08-25-2006 11:49 PM


Re: Here is the next verse
Okay
Yeah, well, you don't care about the truth, but I do. The truth is what guides me through life. But you don't care about that sort of thing. You're interested in being PC and presenting Christianity as PC. Christianity is not PC, Jar.
But you don't care about that. You want things to be nice. So do I, but that is not how life is. Contrary to your birds and flowers concept, life is hard. That's what I was trying to illustrate with the Veterans example. And no, we are not these great unselfish people.
We--you and I---are quite selfish. You don't care about the central issue of any religion--the fact of human suffering--you just dismiss it and call it "natural." But it cannot be dismisssed in that fashion. And you think I'm a jackass for even bringing the matter up.
How dare I suggest that people suffer!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 296 by jar, posted 08-25-2006 11:49 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 298 by purpledawn, posted 08-26-2006 2:23 AM robinrohan has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 298 of 300 (343489)
08-26-2006 2:23 AM
Reply to: Message 297 by robinrohan
08-26-2006 12:25 AM


Foggy
What you have failed to notice all through these several threads, is that your initial response didn't really evoke negative responses. It was your subsequent responses that brought the negative responses.

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by robinrohan, posted 08-26-2006 12:25 AM robinrohan has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 299 of 300 (343492)
08-26-2006 2:26 AM
Reply to: Message 288 by jar
08-25-2006 2:33 PM


Poor Little Petunia
quote:
Wanna sing another verse of Poor Little Petunia?
How many verses are there to that song?

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by jar, posted 08-25-2006 2:33 PM jar has not replied

AdminPD
Inactive Administrator


Message 300 of 300 (343493)
08-26-2006 2:27 AM


End of Thread
300's the limit
Stow the prose,
No more discussion
It's time to close.
Finis
See you in another thread. Magic Wand

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024