3
   

PEOPLE WHO SERVE A "HIGHER" CAUSE: YOU ARE HYPOCRITES FOR YOUR BELIEFS.

 
 
hamilton
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Aug, 2011 05:40 pm
@GracieGirl,
14 for me!
reasoning logic
 
  2  
Reply Sun 28 Aug, 2011 05:54 pm
@hamilton,
Hmmm 2 very smart people that are very young, If you 2 know what is good for you you will know for a fact that young boys and girls are crazy until they reach the age of about 26 years old!
GracieGirl
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Aug, 2011 09:00 pm
@reasoning logic,
HA! Im not crazy! I dont know about hamilton though..... HAHAHA! Mr. Green Laughing Laughing Mr. Green
hamilton
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Aug, 2011 06:01 am
@GracieGirl,
no worries here...
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Aug, 2011 01:41 pm
@hamilton,
hamilton wrote:
If its a higher cause, who are YOU to understand it,
or decide how to bring about it?
I am ME,
and my higher cause is utterly destroying gun control.

HOW am I a hypocrit,
according to u ??????????? Please explain.





David
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Aug, 2011 05:14 pm
@hamilton,
hamilton wrote:

I was just thinking about people who think that they're helping their cause, like humanity, god, earth, so on. but i also wanted to know what made them so sure that they were actually helping. this may be a bad comparison, but Hitler thought he knew what was best for germany, did what he set out to do (sort of) and then fucked EVERYTHING up for his country. i just want to know, what makes their opinion the right one for their cause according to them.


Their opinion and their conviction.

Although we tend to view "conviction" in a favorable light, madmen have conviction.

This is not to say these people are mad, but most of them are convinced they are right.

It's helpful to be prepared and able to reassess one's convictions as circumstances play out, but without conviction there will be no action, or at least not concerted action that might actually affect a positive outcome.

If you're not convinced that your approach to a problem is correct how long will you stick with it, if it doesn't immediately produce a solution?

If everyone's notion of how to solve a problem, no matter how contradictory to one another, is viable, how do you choose the approach to take?

As I have just discovered, you are young, but that's no reason to insult your intelligence. I wonder though if you have yet had the opportunity to be in a situation that could be described as a "crisis?" I'm not talking about a life and death situation, but one where there was a lot of pressure to perform, and not a lot of time to consider options.

In such situations, very talented people who are perceived to be Leaders will frequently prove to be anything but.

You have to be confident to lead. It doesn't guarantee that you will lead well, but without confidence you won't lead at all. Generally speaking the people who are in a "crisis" situation and who do not want to lead, will nevertheless perceive the confidence in those who do, and, more importantly, still be able to measure the sense of the competing leaders' arguments for action.

Sometimes people follow a leader they should not and suffer as a result, but a group of people is usually pretty effective at picking the right one to follow.

Just because they believe they are right, obviously doesn't mean they are, but without a high degree of sureness in their belief they cannot successfully lead. No one wants to or will follow someone who is always doubting themselves.

Perhaps the optimum solution to a problem might come from a prolonged debate among people with no fixed bias or opinion, and no desire to lead the way, but that's not how the world works.

Sadly, most serious problems are not addressed until they are critical, and when a crisis errupts, we need leaders with conviction not people who can't make up their minds.

As you noted, Hitler is not the best example of what you seem to be having trouble with.

In a world where mankind has been crawling around for hundred of thousands of years, and recounting its exploits for thousands, how many individuals have had such an enormous impact on civilization as Adolph Hitler?

You're what? 14? And while you may be more educated and perceptive than many of your peers, your knowing who Hitler is isn't at all surprising.

Yet he died a lifetime ago.

How many of his contemporaries are you aware of, and how many of them would you not be aware of if Hitler hadn't been born?

Generations from now people will know Hitler.

It's amazing.

Think of the billions of people who live right now who you know nothing about and realize that there are billions of people who haven't a clue that you exist, and yet one thing you have in common with a great many of them is that you know who Hitler is.

Maybe Hitler honestly thought he was doing well by his people, but I doubt it. Hitler thought about Hitler. That's a fairly common trait among great leaders...egoism. How could anyone presume to lead a group of people, let alone a nation unless they thought pretty highly of themselves?

Sometimes the confidence of these people is justified and sometimes it gets warped by psychosis, but it is always there.

Confidence and conviction in a person can be infuriating when you whole-heartedly disagree with their beliefs, but look around, and the only hint of hypocrisy you might find is that of your own if you likewise have a deathgrip on your beliefs.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Aug, 2011 05:37 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Generations from now people will know Hitler.


I'm going to bed now Finn, you've gone all apocalyptic again. Get down from your pulpit this instant, and have a bit of a sit down.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Aug, 2011 06:22 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
Perhaps the optimum solution to a problem might come from a prolonged debate among people with no fixed bias or opinion, and no desire to lead the way, but that's not how the world works.


Amen preacher!

Hamilton there are others that are able to think much more clearly than me at times and I am not ashamed to admit that and it seems that Finn dAbuzz is one of them!

What I recommend to you is that you find those who can make the best sense of things and also question every thing even your own conclusions and do not for get that you may be wrong even though things may seem crystal clear at times because we all get things wrong more often the not!
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Aug, 2011 06:42 pm
@izzythepush,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Generations from now people will know Hitler.
izzythepush wrote:
I'm going to bed now Finn, you've gone all apocalyptic again.

Get down from your pulpit this instant, and have a bit of a sit down.
WHERE the hell does Izzy think that he got the authority
to order people around, telling them where to GO??????

Inquiring minds wanna know.





David
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Aug, 2011 07:29 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
finn dAbuzz wrote:
Perhaps the optimum solution to a problem might come from a prolonged debate among people with no fixed bias or opinion, and no desire to lead the way, but that's not how the world works.


That would probably be a welcome first step towards an optimum solution. But where do you propose to find people "with no fixed bias or opion"? I don't believe I've ever met any such paragons of objectivity.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Aug, 2011 01:00 am
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

WHERE the hell does Izzy think that he got the authority
to order people around, telling them where to GO??????

It's motivated by concern about Finn's sanity. It wouldn't do you any harm to have a bit of a sit down either.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Aug, 2011 02:16 am
@izzythepush,

OmSigDAVID wrote:
WHERE the hell does Izzy think that he got the authority
to order people around, telling them where to GO??????
izzythepush wrote:
It's motivated by concern about Finn's sanity.
It wouldn't do you any harm to have a bit of a sit down either.
Maybe Izzy thinks that I type to him standing up.





David
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Aug, 2011 02:42 am
@OmSigDAVID,
I have no idea what you do in front of a computer screen.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Aug, 2011 02:55 am
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:
I have no idea what you do in front of a computer screen.
Well, I 'm glad that u ADMIT it.





David
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Aug, 2011 06:14 am
@OmSigDAVID,
I'm quite pleased to, and furthermore I have no desire to find out what you get up to.
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Aug, 2011 06:22 am
...as far as I can remember the State is the only authority invested by a majority that can order people around, collects taxes and so on...those who oppose the state and the will of a majority should in conformity abandon commerce with such majority and go to live up in the mountains into a cave, that would bring some credibility to their cause.

...as an European my standing point on guns is that gun control is a mild measure to a problem that should rather be about gun prohibition...but to each country its own values, not our problem thankfully.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Aug, 2011 06:24 am
@Fil Albuquerque,
I agree with you, but I'm a European too.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Aug, 2011 07:30 am
@Lustig Andrei,
Me neither, which is why I wrote "...but that's not how the world works."
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Aug, 2011 01:15 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:
Perhaps the optimum solution to a problem might come from a prolonged debate among people with no fixed bias or opinion, and no desire to lead the way, but that's not how the world works.


You seem to be suggesting that fixed bias and opinions may be harmful to intellectual honesty, Is this correct? If so maybe we need to teach this as a fact and find other facts as well that are holding back social evolution but then again who am I to question how the world works?

I would think that science and logic may be able to find a better method or approach to our current condition if we at least acknowledge the problems and look for solutions.

OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 30 Aug, 2011 01:29 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:
...as far as I can remember the State is the only authority invested by a majority that can order people around, collects taxes and so on...those who oppose the state and the will of a majority should in conformity abandon commerce with such majority and go to live up in the mountains into a cave, that would bring some credibility to their cause.

...as an European my standing point on guns is that gun control is a mild measure to a problem that should rather be about gun prohibition...but to each country its own values, not our problem thankfully.
It is very strange, weird, that u 'd deny that a victim
has a Natural right to fight back (effectively)
against his or her predator. Your position is very immoral.

Gun control or gun prohibition serves only evil.





David
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/15/2022 at 10:58:10