Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Very good. But Iran is known to be unmatched worldwide for the amount of philosophy in their schools, book publishing and communities. But which kinds and how broad one might wonder? Perhaps any kind is better than no kind and crass entertainment instead.
You are of course correct about that, no need to be defensive. Academic and peer review is how it's done.DVR wrote:Now before anyone remarks this is no proper way of measuring it, let me tell you this is exactly how academic activity and excellence is measured around the world especially in these disciplines, as long as it's somewhat reputable of course.
But let us not moan about war. The Greek did nothing but warring between philosophizing. Anyone who has attempted to seriously think in his life and survived it won't be surprised.
cousinbasil wrote:How about this for a suggestion? Suppose Iran understands that its oil reserves are limited. Of course Iran understands that, right? Some day, the lights are going to go out, because of the world's craving for oil. But not their lights! Why should they, since that is still where so much of the oil is? Shouldn't the last flicker of light generated from electricity derived from fossil fuels occur in that country where the fuels are? Iran is driven to develop nuclear capability because it must always consider the end game. Might not the rest of the world just come and take the oil? Since that is what has been happening all along, by paying vast sums to small groups of sheiks and largely ignoring any need for "trickling down," those sheiks must be thinking in their 21st Century office buildings, how should we invest our money? What is our trade? What are we good at?
Somewhere, somehow, there will always be Islam and Jews. That's what I am bemoaning. The song that never ends. I can honestly say I do not have a dog in that race. But so many Jews are in one place - and not just any place, our place! If we can't live there, why should they be allowed to? Allowed, yes, becuase now Iran will have nuclear weapons.
It could be a factor although the" last flicker of lights" is at least decades away. Politics these days appear to be more short term than that. Also Iran is still importing almost half of their needed gasoline. Not enough refinery capacity. And to expand that they need decades of investments, including foreign. Hiding behind nuclear weapon options as defense will not solve their problems which all rely on very intensive international trade & trust.
The problem here is the attempt to make these two equivalent: Islam - Jews. As if both would be religion, nothing could be further from truth! Even seeing Israel as an equal to Iran in terms of unity and Ancienty is just a dream. Israel is nothing but modern construct as it is now. A dream which can only keep on going behind walls, security, nuclear arms and loads of deception. Not so strange you're identifying with them! Heh.
cousinbasil wrote:You have misunderstood - what a shocker - I was not attempting to make Islam equivalent to the Jews in any manner. You are trying to read what I have written in a way that entirely misinterprets what I am saying. This is an irksome habit of yours. Islam is a faith (and a corresponding culture which includes Muslims) - the Jews are a people (with a corresponding culture which includes the Jewish faith.) I am saying oil and water do not mix - and you say, well, that's because you are trying to make them equivalent. I am trying to propose what may be a legitimate rationale for Iran's nuclear program, and you say I am identifying with the Jews? I am saying simply that Israel is every bit as real as Iran, and Israel already has nukes. With its nuclear policy, Iran is in fact on a mission designed to make themselves politically equivalent to Israel.
Diebert wrote:Funny is that you're trying to backpedal on what you wrote and end with basically repeating the same sin.
Ah! You misread! The they is the Jews. "...-not just any place, our place!" was supposed to be attributed to an Islamic mindset - Islam considers the Jews - Israel - to be interlopers.You wrote "Somewhere, somehow, there will always be Islam and Jews. That's what I am bemoaning. The song that never ends. I can honestly say I do not have a dog in that race. But so many Jews are in one place - and not just any place, our place! If we can't live there, why should they be allowed to? "
If with they you mean "Iran" then why introduce Islam in your story at all as if that's the major reason of the conflict?
You are saying "oil and water do not mix" but then suddenly claim you were not mixing (comparing, offsetting) them at all. And yet you brought it up. Something is seriously broken in your argumentation machine, just as with all your characters, being it Sam or Broke. It's like a fingerprint and you cannot hide it no matter how you change everything else.
At last you make your point. Why don't I deliberately misunderstand it so you could see how irritating your dumb act gets? Why don't I say this proves you are anti-semitic?Anyway you say Israel is "every bit as real" as Iran. My answer was that this claim is false. A country's "reality" is a function of its connections to its neighbors, its history (as a nation) and the way it's being accepted over time and maintained by exchanges with the immediate neighbors. In all these senses Israel has no real existence apart from immense Western financial, political and military support and foreign immigration waves
Israel defies the reality principle and can only really exist by opening up: the one state solution, "the end of the world" and of course many in Israel for this reason feel like they are 'fighting for survival" that is: surviving the myth of their existence as Jewish nation. Iran is crucial in this process because of their material and political support for the Palestinian claims for refugee status, Hezbollah and through Syria also Hamas (although this is shifting somewhat with events - this is why Isreal will support the revolution in Syria no matter what, even if it means helping al-Qaeda along the way. AQ is no direct threat being a non-state entity as well).
cousinbasil wrote:Ah! You misread! The they is the Jews. "...-not just any place, our place!" was supposed to be attributed to an Islamic mindset - Islam considers the Jews - Israel - to be interlopers.
I suppose you are still Tomas butt-buddy with the "Broke" thing (well, he says "Brokie" which is a term he himself made up.) And now there is this Sam, whoever that is. Anyone one else while you are at it? No wonder you have trouble understanding me.
Why don't I say this proves you are anti-semitic?
So in 1800, the U.S. was not real because it was less than 50 years old
The very first step in any military conflagration is always to somehow dehumanize your enemy,
This "myth" the Israelis seem to share has lasted these past 70 or so years despite the reactions of Israel's neighbors - it is a direct descendant of the "myth" of Jewish nationhood as a people, together despite their diaspora, a myth that has lasted thousands of years.
I have read enough of a Koran translation to know that vilification of the Jews as Christ-killers is a repeated theme.
Again, I personally have no dog in the Arab-Israeli race: any use of nuclear weapons is a nightmare. But I suppose to an anti-Semite like you, this is not so nightmarish...
But that's just it - anti-Zionism has been around for well over a hundred years. To call it local and to call it a sentiment is to gloss over the antisemitism which is its very basis. You are excusing it.Even worse! It's not the Islam that claims the land apart from the holy site in Jerusalem. The struggle is mostly a local Arab sentiment, deeply linked to the perception of Zionism being just another colonialist project. Mixed in with antisemitic sentiments lingering from the 19th century when the disease of nationalism was always looking for scapegoat.
Because being anti-semitic has nothing to do with how one thinks about the current multi-ethnic, multi-religious state of Israel or its right to exist as pure Jewish state. Some try to make a link but it's really reaching. It's in fact the state of Israel which is proving to be on the way to full apartheid, fascism en militarism. Then again, the U.S. is following.
Shit and crap. Say, your English is really coming along! Again you are a dolt who knows nothing and I still don't know who Sam is. Uncle Sam? Like Uncle Brokie? Fascinating.Man, that's already been proven beyond any doubt. You tell the same shitty stories to the detail and wield the same crappy logic.
Yes, after the U.S. had militarily defended itself against a half-hearted British attempt to put down the rebellion.History is not your strongest point. But which one really is? The Treaty of Paris supplied a strong foundation and there was recognition from the formerly disputing parties and the rest of Europe following suit. Colonial powers like France, Spain and the Netherlands were already on the US side. In contrast the UN partition plan for Israel is still waiting.
What Jews do you know? I have never met a Jew who did not support Israel's right to exist. It is always the non-Jew who uses the term Zionism, and always in a pejorative sense.That's Zionism, it's not Judaism or a common Jewish dream. You have been confused. A great many Jews are not interested at all in Israel as a Jewish state or anything like it is now.
You silly man. "A dog in the race" is an expression.There is no race between the Arab pan-ethnicity and the Israeli nationality here, you emptyhead.
The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace , not (the way) of those who earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians).
Know they (Jews) not that Allah knows what they conceal and what they reveal?
And when it is said to them (the Jews), "Believe in what Allah has sent down," they say, "We believe in what was sent down to us." And they disbelieve in that which came after it, while it is the truth confirming what is with them
And verily, you will find them (the Jews) the greediest of mankind for life and (even greedier) than those who - ascribe partners to Allah (and do not believe in Resurrection - Magians, pagans, and idolaters, etc.).
Many of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) wish that if they could turn you away as disbelievers after you have believed, out of envy from their ownselves
The fools (pagans, hypocrites, and Jews) among the people will say, "What has turned them (Muslims) from their Qiblah [prayer direction (towards Jerusalem)] to which they were used to face in prayer.
O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians): "Why do you mix truth with falsehood and conceal the truth while you know?"
O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.
But on account of their breaking their covenant We cursed them and made their hearts hard; they altered the words from their places and they neglected a portion of what they were reminded of; and you shall always discover treachery in them excepting a few of them; so pardon them and turn away; surely Allah loves those who do good (to others).
Every feeling is like a summary of data, a quick encapsulation of all the information processing that we don’t have access to. (As Pham puts it, emotions are like a “privileged window” into the subterranean mind.) When it comes to making predictions about complex events, this extra information is often essential. It represents the difference between an informed guess and random chance."
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/ ... prophetic/
Consider the results from the American Idol quiz: while high-trust-in-feelings subjects correctly predicted the winner 41 percent of the time, those who distrusted their emotions were only right 24 percent of the time. The same lesson applied to the stock market, that classic example of a random walk: those emotional souls made predictions that were 25 percent more accurate than those who aspired to Spock-like cognition.
What explains these paradoxical results? The answer involves processing power. In recent years, it’s become clear that the unconscious brain is able to process vast amounts of information in parallel, thus allowing it to analyze large data sets without getting overwhelmed. (Human reason, in contrast, has a very strict bottleneck and can only process about four bits of data at any given moment.) But this raises the obvious question: how do we gain access to all this analysis, which by definition is taking place outside of conscious awareness?
Here’s where emotions come in handy. Every feeling is like a summary of data, a quick encapsulation of all the information processing that we don’t have access to. (As Pham puts it, emotions are like a “privileged window” into the subterranean mind.) When it comes to making predictions about complex events, this extra information is often essential. It represents the difference between an informed guess and random chance.
cousinbasil wrote:I suppose you are still Tomas butt-buddy with the "Broke" thing (well, he says "Brokie" which is a term he himself made up.)
Prof Dunbar wrote:At root the important relationships are those between women and not those between men. Men's relationships are too casual. They often function at a high level in a political sense, of course; but at the end of the day, the structure of society is driven by women, which is exactly what we see in primates," he explains.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests