What can we learn by listening to folks advocate holy war?

[Martin]

the folks I mean are friends and relations, people we think are generally nice, or resemble us in most ways.

 

when one of them gets war fever and starts calling for war against Islam, and gives reasons-----like the way the Taliban treated women in Afghanistan or some other moral absolute-----like that suicide bombers kill noncombatants (many of them women and children like those the Dresden fire consumed, like those consumed in Hiroshima)----when the tone of voice starts to get really punitive, self-righteous, and vindictive, what can we learn?

 

I think by listening carefully we can probably learn something about ourselves.

 

and maybe there is something to learn about war itself, as a way to achieve moral ends

 

or about the use of war and economic sanctions to better the condition of, for instance, women and children

 

about the constructiveness of invading and pushing other people around, which might sometimes make them grateful but can also easily increase hatred and resentment.

 

about which policies actually increase security and which ones do not

=================

 

but mostly, by listening to the voice of outrage and moral absolutism, we can LEARN HOW IT FEELS TO BE ON THE OTHER SIDE and how implacable fury and hatred can take root in them because of things we do.

 

=================

 

George Brennan is now in his 90s. He was the young Soviet specialist and diplomat in the State Department who first formulated (in the 1950s) a rational firm non-aggressive containment policy for dealing with Soviet expansionism.

 

Brennan, author of a policy followed by several successive administrations, was what I would call a tough empathic.

 

He taught himself to feel how Soviet citizens felt, and to think how Soviet leaders thought. Used to say that reading Russian novels taught him the most.

No fool.

 

I was thinking of him the other day.

[Martin]

but I should not be answering myself

 

I would like to hear others ideas----like Severian, or Phi, or [corrected] AweBurn.

 

AweBurn made a really good point in some other thread where he said that it wasnt the Bikinis that maddened the muslims,

it was the commercial and cultural IMPERIALISM

 

which is soooo on target. and the answer he got for trying to explain a basic fact was that he must be sick or a coward.

 

Well, this is an open thread. WHAT DO YOU LEARN from listening to calls for all-out war against Islam?

 

(what is the aim? to make Islam a better religion? to replace the societies which host Islam with less religious societies?)

 

do you maybe learn NOTHING AT ALL? I'm interested in any kind of answer.

[AweBurn]

Being such an open topic I feel like I should write a book and simply link you its Amazon.com page.

 

I love your mention of knowing how it "feels to be on the other side".

 

I think this is an aspect of human morality that is often overlooked. I dont believe in divine command ethics for this exact reason. Rather than allowing the individual to actively engage in a personal exploration of truth, the religions often dictate truth that means nothing to its recipient.

 

To understand how those affected by your actions feel as a result of them is a necessary component of moral fiber many have lost.

 

 

-AweBurn

========

"Those who know they are profound strive for clarity. Those who would like to seem profound to the crowd strive for obscurity..."

-Nietzsche

[john5746]

but mostly' date=' by listening to the voice of outrage and moral absolutism, we can LEARN HOW IT FEELS TO BE ON THE OTHER SIDE and how implacable fury and hatred can take root in them because of things we do.

 

[/quote']

 

This is the lesson I think. To realize that the other side is human and subject to the same failings as anyone else. Dehumanizing a group of people is what leads to great attrocities.

[Bettina]

Ok, I get the message and I didn't even have to read between the lines to find my name.

 

I apologize to any of you that I've offended. I have to realize that this forum consists of people who speak logically and intellegently while everything I do is emotionally based.

 

So, forgive me please, and I promise to keep my personal emotion to myself and either speak logically or not at all. Unfortunately, I posted to Matt Grime already. I hope he forgives me too.

 

Again, I'm sorry and I'm sorry that this thread had to even start.

 

Bettina

[Martin]

no problemo

in my view a passionate moral outburst sometimes clears the air like a thunderstorm

and could also be valuable because a certain amount of strident conflict and challenge to authority (if intelligently thought out and expressed) livens the place up.

 

BTW Bettina this what I am about to say is not about you----I wanted to get your reaction. I often valued RevPrez presence very much (he was admittedly stiff-necked and obnoxious in the extreme), I also thoroughly disagreed with his politics, and disapproved of the way he would argue and take preposterous positions (as I saw it).

 

He got too many warnings as was banned. I actually miss the guy. It is too quiet a lot of the time. And I think he taught me something----not sure what though.

 

Do you remember RevPrez, and do you have any opinion of him and whether he was good or bad to have around? (I think he may have later returned briefly under some other name but if he did I forget what it was)

 

Any answer is fine---I am not necessarily looking for agreement but for reasons from another mind. But agreement is fine too of course.

[ecoli]

when one of them gets war fever and starts calling for war against Islam' date=' and gives reasons-----like the way the Taliban treated women in Afghanistan or some other moral absolute-----like that suicide bombers kill noncombatants (many of them women and children like those the Dresden fire consumed, like those consumed in Hiroshima)----[/quote']

 

you don't think there is a difference between civilian casualties of war and terrorism?

[bascule]

What I've really learned is what a divisive force religion can be in international politics. I've always considered the resurgance of imperialism among the neocons as having an almost "Christianity vs. Islam" type of air to it.

 

I'm leaning more towards isolationism. I would like to see us pull out of the region completely and military subsidies to Israel ended, and a neutral stance adopted on the whole Israel issue entirely.

 

Sadly, what the Danish cartoons have shown us is that isolationism is no longer an effecive policy in the highly interconnected world in which we live.

[Bettina]

no problemo

in my view a passionate moral outburst sometimes clears the air like a thunderstorm

and could also be valuable because a certain amount of strident conflict and challenge to authority (if intelligently thought out and expressed) livens the place up.

 

BTW Bettina this what I am about to say is not about you----I wanted to get your reaction. I often valued RevPrez presence very much (he was admittedly stiff-necked and obnoxious in the extreme)' date=' I also thoroughly disagreed with his politics, and disapproved of the way he would argue and take preposterous positions (as I saw it).

 

He got too many warnings as was banned. I actually miss the guy. It is too quiet a lot of the time. And I think he taught me something----not sure what though.

 

Do you remember RevPrez, and do you have any opinion of him and whether he was good or bad to have around? (I think he may have later returned briefly under some other name but if he did I forget what it was)

 

Any answer is fine---I am not necessarily looking for agreement but for reasons from another mind. But agreement is fine too of course.[/quote']

 

No, I don't know him, but if he got warnings then I don't want to be like him. I've learned a lesson here about what I should and should not debate. Since I am emotion based, I don't always fit in with certain posts like religion and politics. I'm going to cool it for awhile because this thread upset me big time.

 

I know its nothing personal, but I need to re-examine my feelings on what is right and wrong. The last thing I want is to get a warning.

 

Bettina

[Martin]

... I'm going to cool it for awhile because this thread upset me big time.

...

 

sorry to hear that, but you know best what's good for you

 

I think you did yeoman service (yeowoman?) in opening up the issues and energizing people----and getting new people like AweBurn to speak their minds

 

sometimes i think a board like this is a group brain and different posters contribute different functions----like the amygdala and the medula oblongata and the visual cortex and the optical chiasm etc heh heh dumb analogy---almost like different ORGANS----without enough different organs the thing will go to sleep and not wake up

 

I think everybody or nearly everybody values your contrib'n very much and there is no parallel with RevPrez, I just thought I'd get your take on him if you knew him. It doesnt have to do with you, I just miss his input here.

 

well, so long, maybe I will see you in cosmology

[aguy2]

I often valued RevPrez presence very much (he was admittedly stiff-necked and obnoxious in the extreme)' date=' I also thoroughly disagreed with his politics, and disapproved of the way he would argue and take preposterous positions (as I saw it).

 

He got too many warnings as was banned. I actually miss the guy. It is too quiet a lot of the time. And I think he taught me something----not sure what though.

 

Do you remember RevPrez, and do you have any opinion of him and whether he was good or bad to have around? (I think he may have later returned briefly under some other name but if he did I forget what it was)

 

Any answer is fine---I am not necessarily looking for agreement but for reasons from another mind. But agreement is fine too of course.[/quote']

 

Bascule seemed to think he was using PCS; he started a thread in Phil.& Rel called Proof v. Evidence. I am afraid I whacked him pretty hard with my intellectual blugeon paradigm and I never heard from him since.

aguy2