People are pissed, and rightly so. The thing is, there's some of us that are pissed because of the great injustices perpetrated against the people, while others are just spoiled brats who can't get their way. The problem is, it's tough to tell the difference, because the whiny brats that can't get their way act as if they've been done a horrible injustice.
What a pithy.
It's true you can't tell just from the anger, but a single conversation with them about the issue should clear that up.
edit: Then again, sometimes you can tell just from the anger, based on tone.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Who is to say the brats didnt get something right for once, even if it's for all the wrong reasons?
I was just thinking about the differences between righteous indignation and spoiled brattery and how often they reach similar comclusions about something but got there differently. Both sides, expecting m company, turn hostile to each other when they were just about to agree. The confusion is so great that these groups turn inward and try to regroup when simply a jams extended however timidly might have made more progress
Will try to remember to Polish this later and expand on it of anyone wants me to
Cuddlyfister, I know that wasn't what you were saying but it struck me
(http://i.imgur.com/ZtqTf.png) (http://imgur.com/ZtqTf)
It says a lot about people when a "Great noble truth" is something as quippish as "Life is pain".
Pain and morality are both priceless. Read that as price-less. You cannot pay enough to make up to someone that they have suffered, and trying is just entitling them based on a fact of life. You cannot MAKE someone be moral without getting mired in a discussion of what constituted morality.
Anything getting done to releive suffering seems to be one of few things to happen on a legit democratic basis.
Quote from: Richter, Baron von on May 24, 2012, 10:03:59 PM
It says a lot about people when a "Great noble truth" is something as quippish as "Life is pain".
Pain and morality are both priceless. Read that as price-less. You cannot pay enough to make up to someone that they have suffered, and trying is just entitling them based on a fact of life. You cannot MAKE someone be moral without getting mired in a discussion of what constituted morality.
Anything getting done to releive suffering seems to be one of few things to happen on a legit democratic basis.
except the "its for their own good" card, otherwise its imposing a worldview over another
Quote from: Joh'Nyx on May 24, 2012, 11:00:06 PM
Quote from: Richter, Baron von on May 24, 2012, 10:03:59 PM
It says a lot about people when a "Great noble truth" is something as quippish as "Life is pain".
Pain and morality are both priceless. Read that as price-less. You cannot pay enough to make up to someone that they have suffered, and trying is just entitling them based on a fact of life. You cannot MAKE someone be moral without getting mired in a discussion of what constituted morality.
Anything getting done to relieve suffering seems to be one of few things to happen on a legit democratic basis.
except the "its for their own good" card, otherwise its imposing a worldview over another
Exactly why morality can't be imposed
Quote from: The Freeky of SCIENCE! on May 23, 2012, 07:36:54 AM
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Who is to say the brats didnt get something right for once, even if it's for all the wrong reasons?
I was just thinking about the differences between righteous indignation and spoiled brattery and how often they reach similar comclusions about something but got there differently. Both sides, expecting m company, turn hostile to each other when they were just about to agree. The confusion is so great that these groups turn inward and try to regroup when simply a jams extended however timidly might have made more progress
Will try to remember to Polish this later and expand on it of anyone wants me to
Cuddlyfister, I know that wasn't what you were saying but it struck me
Like, yeah, opposing people can get to the same conclusions, or rather maybe say, opposing people think a certain path of action is the correct one for different reasons, but what really separates people i would think is motivation
And agreeing with Epimetheus, one can only get to know motivation thru talking with the given persons or groups; one rarely can derive a motivation or reason behind an action clearly
Surely one could say "self-benefit", but that only gets one so far, because what one considers "beneficial" can be totally warped and distorted that it only makes sense to themselves