RE: virus: The Ideohazard 1.1

From: Jonathan Davis (jonathan.davis@lineone.net)
Date: Fri Sep 26 2003 - 11:29:10 MDT

  • Next message: Jake Sapiens: "virus: RE: Unilateralism"

     

    -----Original Message-----
    From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com] On Behalf Of
    Hermit
    Sent: 26 September 2003 14:23
    To: virus@lucifer.com
    Subject: Re:virus: The Ideohazard 1.1

    [Jonathan Davis] You, like Kharin, have stooped to defamation over content.
    Scruton is a first and foremost an philosopher, and a superb one at that. I
    can testify to this as I have read the book in question.

    [Hermit] Nope. Scruton isn't a "superb" philosopher. He is a media figure
    who plays the role of a philosopher on programs appealing to Fux TV viewers.
    He is probably most famous for accepting money from Japan Tobacco
    International to write pro-smoking articles in the various newspapers that
    murder trees on his behalf. And then getting found out. Said newspapers
    ended up sacking him for his pains. (Kharin's contribution.)

    [Jonathan 1] The tobacco thing is completely irrelevant. It was a crude
    attempt at the same sort of well poisoning I complained about earlier.

    [Jonathan Davis] Why you inserted the irrelevant comments about race
    consciousness I do not know. Redefining the out-group is easy when I can
    force you into the in-group at spear point.

    [Hermit] Not when the tip is irrefutably entagled somewhere in your own
    anatomy.

    [Jonathan 1] Yes, but why did you put it in?

    [Hermit] Having told two people whom you regularly characterize as
    intelligent, fair, experienced and articulate that they are engaging in
    defamation - which you should recognise is always stupid - something seems
    to be out of kilter.

    [Jonathan 1] Not at all. There is no deliberate malice on your or Kharin's
    part. I see such things as mistakes, rhetorical devices that are unfair.

    [Hermit] My recommendation was for you to read some Toynbee in order to try
    to get a better handle on history before you decide that Scruton represents
    a pinnacle of historical excellence upon which you can base your entire
    opinion of the field.

    [Jonathan 1] That is completely fair, but not what you said (or at least
    what was communicated to me). Firstly, I would have corrected you: I was not
    basing my my entire opinion of any field on any one person or book.
    Secondly, I recommend Scruton's book "To understand why these agreements are
    being undermined". These agreements referred to certain agreements and
    notions in western politics. Scruton examines what happens to consensus
    models when pre-political loyalties are dissolved.

    [Jonathan Davis] As a scientist, sceptic and atheist perhaps you would be
    better advised expounding on Toynbee's "use of myths and metaphors as being
    of comparable value to factual data and his reliance on a view of religion
    as a regenerative force" http://concise.britannica.com/ebc/article?eu=406334

    [Hermit] Perhaps you were unaware that Toynbee was an atheist and a skeptic
    - and probably the first historian to attempt a modern scientific approach
    to history on a grand scale (i.e. looking at the macro-event level). Perhaps
    that is why I appreciate him.

    [Jonathan 1] I will try and get hold of some of his volumes or perhaps an
    abridged work.

    [Hermit] Look in a mirror. Observing that myth and metaphor is important and
    plays a huge role in life and history is no more, and certainly no less,
    than what the CoV is engaged in. What else is "memetics" other than myth,
    metaphor and their effects on their carriers.

    [Jonathan 1] Perhaps. That is a different albeit interesting discussion
    perhaps as a topic for a chat.

    [Hermit] In any case, I suggest that somebody's perspective is flawed and
    that cognitive dissonance is almost certainly at work. Particularly when it
    comes to your repeatedly rejected strange idea that I advocate any Theistic
    religions. The difference between you and I, it seems, is that I condemn
    them all equally, rather than reserving a fondness for the Anglicans. This
    includes recognizing that your (and that of your sources) blanket
    condemnation of Middle Eastern and Asian culture is rooted in your
    apparently shallow perspective. Had you been brought up in, e.g. The PRC,
    your opinion would no doubt be different. Which allows me to condemn your
    judgements, They are not measured, but are rooted in cultural prejudice.

    [Jonathan 1] Here you revert to the standard charge that those who disagree
    with you suffer from a pathology of some sort. I do not blanket condemn
    anything. Neither does Scruton. It would be useful if you could serve some
    examples as I do not think they exist.

    You can label me or my perspective whatever you like (shallow etc.) The
    vehemence of your contempt does not actually help your arguments all. I
    could, but shall not, make exactly the same plausible claims about you that
    you are making about me. It is specious and unhelpful.

    [Jonathan Davis] Or is your selective quoting of Toynbee just a case of a
    quoting another set of scriptures for one's own purposes?

    [Hermit] The man was prodigiously productive, having written upwards of 100
    works, many of them seminal. I recall your complaining of a few paragraphs
    of summary recently - on the grounds you had no time to read them. If you
    don't want a flood which will make Dees look restrained, I suggest that you
    be glad that I am selective.

    [Jonathan 1] You may be incontinent if you choose. I do have delete but
    after all and a fast internet connection.

    [Hermit] As for quoting Toynbee*, he serves as a counterpoise to Scruton and
    Co, reminding you of their "western universalist" position. While your
    knowledge of Islamic history as portrayed here is so flawed as to render
    discussion meaningless until you obtain a better background, bigotry and
    prejudicial interpretations abound, and you seem to have soaked up and in
    consequence appear to be advocating some percentage of it.

    [Jonathan 1] Instead of calling me names and talking up your boy Toynbee,
    why don't you do something substantive like support an assertion or craft an
    argument?

    You make claims about Toynbee, yet I read he is a buffoon. I give you (and
    Toynbee) the benefit of the doubt, you respond with name calling. I am not
    allowed to mention your bigotries and prejudices in case you accuse me of
    risking your life.

    [Jonathan Davis] I find it delightfully ironic that you approving quote
    Toynbee's reference to Islamic universalism -namely the surrendered are all
    equal before Allah (hence no need for other classifications like race or
    nation), yet for Toynbee "the West's universalist pretensions" are
    disgusting.

    [Hermit] Think about what you say - or better, research it. Preferably not
    in a book written by an ahl al-q'itab with his own problems - and writing
    out of field. Who defeated the alchemists and Jews of Medieval Europe? Where
    did they flee? What is the purpose of jizya? Can somebody "conquered" be
    subjected to "Dhimmitude" and "equal in surrender"? I know the answers. Do
    you?

    [Jonathan 1] Yes. The answer is 42. This display of cut and paste
    "learning" does not wash. Scruton crafts superb arguments based on real
    learning. Hint: That is the way you can earn my respect.

    [Jonathan Davis] I am alarmed that how you are so forgiving and even
    admiring of our deadliest and fastest growing competitor - Islam. Do you
    really mean to side with this militant religion against our secular, Western
    model of politics?

    [Hermit] You shouldn't be alarmed. You certainly shouldn't imagine that
    Islam is deadly - except in a rather boring sense. Like any other belief
    system, its adherents adapt it to fit their situation and justify their
    actions. When living repressed in a brutal environment, it can be used to
    justify suicide bombing.

    [Jonathan 1] Yes. The problem is that actions are often unjustified and
    reasons faulty. Being a pampered fat and rich Saudi can justify attacks on
    towers. The justifications can be as bizarre and they are numerous.

    [Hermit] Just as Christianity justified revolution in England and the
    forcing of China to purchase opium from the English

    [Jonathan 1] The Opium Wars were part of the larger British Empire strategy
    of forcing global trade. It has next to nothing to do with Christianity.

    [Hermit] and apartheid lead to the necklacing of teachers by "rational
    atheistic humanists"

    [Jonathan 1] Those teachers were necklaced by bloodlust aroused mobs
    scapegoating.

    [Hermit] and economic crises and belief in racial superiority lead the US
    to justify nuking Japan.

    [Jonathan 1] I don't man to object to your examples. I know it is bad
    manners and distracting, but how can you justify this sort of statement. It
    strikes me as..well..a joke? An economic crisis in 1945? Racial superiority
    justified the bomb? Are you for real?

    [Hermit] When times are better, the very same beliefs might lead to quiet
    discussions over tea and cucumber sandwiches with the Imam.

    [Jonathan 1] Yes. Humans are situational creatures.

    [Hermit] As a second issue, you need to read the news from time to time.

    [Jonathan 1] On the contrary, I need to read it less. I have such a range of
    sources and feeds that I tire from analysing them all.

    [Hermit] Neither of the two global "B"s (i.e. the smirking chimp and his
    poodle) hide the fact that they were called by a Middle Eastern god to save
    the world from itself. So much for a secular Western model of politics.

    [Jonathan 1] Using puerile labels for Bush and Blair is fine, if a little
    sad. That they think that their actions are ordained in a guess.

    [Jonathan Davis] Your words remind me of something Orwell wrote:

    [Jonathan Davis] "why is it that the worst extremes of jingoism and
    racialism have to be tolerated when they come from an Irishman? Why is a
    statement like "My country right or wrong" reprehensible if applied to
    England and worthy of respect if applied to Ireland (or for that matter to
    India)? For there is no doubt that some such convention exists and that
    "enlightened" opinion in England can swallow even the most blatant
    nationalism so long as it is not British nationalism. Poems like "Rule,
    Britannia!" or "Ye Mariners of England" would be taken seriously if one
    inserted at the right places the name of some foreign country, as one can
    see by the respect accorded to various French and Russian war poets to-day."

    [Hermit] Actually that could be another example of bigoted jingoism (and
    possibly your cognitive dissonance flaring up again). As a half-Scotsman, I
    reject the idea that England is synonymous with Great Britain! And if you
    had comprehended anything I have written on politics, you would be aware
    that I regard all "nationalistic jingoism" as being equally harmful to
    humans. Indeed, doubly harmful, in that "nationalism" by itself is a curse,
    and "jingoism" a disease of the intellect.

    [Jonathan 1] He does not make them synonymous at all so as a half-Scot you
    let your nationalism cool again. The paucity of objections suggests you
    agree with him.

    [Jonathan Davis]As for you Hermit, oppugnancy is damaging you. Perhaps
    "surrender" is what you really need?

    [Hermit] Despite it having become the norm in American politics, your
    diagnosis appears as flawed as the idea of the inmates running the asylum.
    All right thinking people recognise that the world is neither black nor
    white, but a rather attractive shade of grey. Perhaps it is difficult to
    recognise when you are running around with beams in your eyes. Maybe an
    optician could assist you?

    [Jonathan 1] [Side Note: "All right thinking people" - So many kooky
    conspiracy theories, fallacies and extremist rants have this marker imbedded
    in them it is a useful shortcut for discarding bunk at the scanning phase.
    Simply scan for it and if found, hit delete. ]

    Again, irony creeps into our discussion. No sooner have you reminded me of
    your being Scottish than you commit the "No True Scotsman Fallacy".
    Priceless.

    Kind regards

    Jonathan

    ---
    To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Sep 26 2003 - 11:29:51 MDT