aspose file tools*
The moose likes Meaningless Drivel and the fly likes On destroying fascism Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Other » Meaningless Drivel
Reply locked New topic
Author

On destroying fascism

Jason Menard
Sheriff

Joined: Nov 09, 2000
Posts: 6450
Originally posted by Pakka Desi:
Now, this is where I object..."some part of the world simply can't handle it". This is a wrong way to put it. You always try to convey that somehow your values are better and others are inferior that they don't get it. The fact is, your values are no better or worse than others. Your values simply do not apply everywhere. You don't seem to get this point.
Anyway...

You again miss the point. Have you ever been to Bosnia? Do you know what would happen there if the international community were to leave? This is an example of a people who cannot handle unadulterated freedom and democracy. Their freedom and deomcracy currently will only exist as long as the international community keeps an eye on things there. They would kill each other in a second. This is what I am referring to.
There are parts of the world that as soon as they are free from the chains of dictatorship, they use their new found freedom to kill their neighbor because he has a different culture/religion/ethnicity/whatever. This is what I mean when I say some people can't handle it.
[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: Jason Menard ]
frank davis
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 12, 2001
Posts: 1479
Originally posted by Pakka Desi:

Now, this is where I object..."some part of the world simply can't handle it". This is a wrong way to put it. You always try to convey that somehow your values are better and others are inferior that they don't get it. The fact is, your values are no better or worse than others. Your values simply do not apply everywhere. You don't seem to get this point.
Anyway...

Yes, how dare he suggest that freedom is better than slavery. Why, I bet he would have even said some socities are even better than others if we had let him continue.
Jason Menard
Sheriff

Joined: Nov 09, 2000
Posts: 6450
Originally posted by Pakka Desi:
The fact is, your values are no better or worse than others. Your values simply do not apply everywhere. You don't seem to get this point.
Anyway...

You are mistaken. Freedom and democracy are universal goals all humans are meant to achieve. Freedom is better than servitude. Democracy is better than autocracy. So yes, some "values" are better than others.
Jason Menard
Sheriff

Joined: Nov 09, 2000
Posts: 6450
Originally posted by herb slocomb:
Why, I bet he would have even said some socities are even better than others if we had let him continue.

I wouldn't have said that. It's too obvious.
frank davis
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 12, 2001
Posts: 1479
Originally posted by Jason Menard:

I wouldn't have said that. It's too obvious.

Obvious only after my numerous, holy, selfless posts in another prior thread.
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Great! Can we leave the thread at this?


Uncontrolled vocabularies
"I try my best to make *all* my posts nice, even when I feel upset" -- Philippe Maquet
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 05, 2000
Posts: 13974
Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
"It comes from kicking ass in a couple of world wars. If destroying fascism and communism around the world was a breeze then what's the big deal about coding some program. "

Again you forget the little smiley. it was meant as a joke.


Associate Instructor - Hofstra University
Amazon Top 750 reviewer - Blog - Unresolved References - Book Review Blog
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 05, 2000
Posts: 13974
Originally posted by Sankar Subbiah:

Where there is a will, there is a way. Even the monks escaped from China by taking Himalayan routes to enter India. Do a google on Tibetian uprising.
You are selectively quoting my post. Do you agree that the risk involved with the proxy war you were waging against soviet union was much higher than than even the direct war with China? What would have happend if the Soviet issued an ultimum saying "if you dont disband the terrorist camps in pakistan, we would invade or nuke the whole pakistan"? Remember 1963 and Kennedy? Would the US dare to go to nuclear war and risking millions of american's life for saving afgans?

I do not agree that a proxy war with the Soviet Union was more dangerous than a direct war with China. There was rally no possibility of the Soviets making the kind of threat you suggest. How would they back it up? By nuking Pakistan? That would have ended the world. The Soviets had way too much to lose to try to play that game.
As far as Tibet goes, it is a lot easier to sneak some people out than it is to supply weapons to Tibet. You can say "where there is a will there is way" but unless you can demonstrate how it would have been possible you are just blowing smoke.
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 05, 2000
Posts: 13974
Originally posted by Pakka Desi:
Ok let's just end this, Do you seriously believe that US had any interest in the well being of Afgn. people? Yes or No. I don't believe it.
Yes and we still do. And I don't care what you believe.
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Apparently not. Well, at least it worked for a couple of hours...
Oh, I meant my proposal to leave this thread "as is".
Tom, this can be cultural difference at work, I did not know anybody can joke about this stuff.
[ December 18, 2002: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]
R K Singh
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 15, 2001
Posts: 5371
Originally posted by Thomas Paul:
We would have very happily have supported the Tibetans but how? ...

Please leave Tibet alone.... they are fighting their own way...
Stop giving charity, even in ur personal life too.
If China rises more there is no doubt that to down him Tibet will be a good reason.
Today in this world, there is only China who does what he wants to do.
I dont remember the year,when US said China to not to supply some ammu to Pakistan. But China simply overlooked that statement and supplied ammun.
No doubt if we see US charity in Tibet also.
R K Singh
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 15, 2001
Posts: 5371
Originally posted by Jason Menard:
....but to also spread our own values. Liberating the Afghans from the Soviets, for example, is in line with what our goals were. ...

And then leave them huungry and in the hands of criminal .....
Yes, you were spreading your own values... Use and throw.
R K Singh
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 15, 2001
Posts: 5371
Originally posted by herb slocomb:

I realize that formal logic is not taught widely in the Middle East and Asia which is a pity,


Have you ever been out of your well ???

Conclusions can be proven absolutely true or false based on the premises and the reasoning used to arrive at the results.

What is the value of zero?? Can you explain me ??
I want absolute value of Zero. Any link/book or what ever you think that might give good reasoning for the value of zero, will hold good.

It was the science of logic that helped the development of symbolic notational systems leading to computers. See "The Universal Computer" after you investigate formal logic.

Zero symbol plays a major role in The Universal Computer.
R K Singh
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 15, 2001
Posts: 5371
Originally posted by Jason Menard:

I wouldn't have said that. It's too obvious.

Any good society/country without money .....
AW herb when your search is over for better society then do inform ..
R K Singh
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 15, 2001
Posts: 5371
Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
Great! Can we leave the thread at this?

Why dont you simply delete it ....
and you have a luxry of being moderator too..
R K Singh
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 15, 2001
Posts: 5371
Originally posted by Thomas Paul:
Who says they do?

[smiling] do you act to be innocent or you are ?
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Quoted by Ravish Kumar:
Conclusions can be proven absolutely true or false based on the premises and the reasoning used to arrive at the results.
I missed this one...
I realize that formal logic is not taught widely in the Middle East and Asia which is a pity, but there really are absolutes in logic. Conclusions can be proven absolutely true or false based on the premises and the reasoning used to arrive at the results.
Herb, what about Probabilistic Logic?
Not in every case can the conclusions be verified, but in many, and even more commonly while the results cannot always be verified, incorrect reasoning can be identified.
Logic (apparently you are talking about first-order predicate logic, there are many other) operates on "propositions" (example: "snow is white"). Now based on rules of logic (how we defined them) we can combine those propositions.
1. I like everything white
2. Snow is white
Conclusion: "I like snow"
Ok. First, what if am not quite sure if I like white or not? 2. How do you know that the snow *is* white? What if the other guy is saying it is not?
Pakka Desi:
"There is no absolute. Your logic could be as absurd to somebody else as somebody else's logic is to you."
-- what if to read it as "your reasoning could be as absurd to somebody else as somebody else's reasoning is to you" -- is it Ok now? I suspect this is what Pakka *really* means (well, I can be wrong, of course) rather then to criticize your choice of formal-logical systems or failures in applying them. That your premises -- what you fed into your logical machine -- are wrong.
I understand that you believe there *are* absolutes, and whether you are right or not, this scares me. This is precisely what I heard from my birth, that there is the Absolute Truth, and that it's already written in certain books. "Marx' theory is omnipotent, because it is true". These are precisely absolutes, in the sake of what people were killed.
I've never seen more intolerant people than those who believes in "absolute truth".
[ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]
Sameer Jamal
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 16, 2001
Posts: 1870

Ok. First, what if am not quite sure if I like white or not? 2. How do you know that the snow *is* white? What if the other guy is saying it is not?[/QB]

Fuzzy Logic
frank davis
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 12, 2001
Posts: 1479
Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:

1. I like everything white
2. Snow is white
Conclusion: "I like snow"
Ok. First, what if am not quite sure if I like white or not? 2. How do you know that the snow *is* white? What if the other guy is saying it is not?

Wow, syllogistic logic has just been blown out of the water!!! Aristotle and all the other philosophers for the last thousand or so years missed that point! Now I see why logic has fallen into such disrepute in society; its so worthless. :roll:
Or.
Or maybe you missed the point I said about it being based on premises. "Based" meaning relied upon, or providing a foundation for. Meaning that if your premises are wrong, there obviously will be a problem with your conclusions. This is so elementary I hope I am missing your point, which I hope is merely a restatement of my statement on logic being based on premises. Faulty premises are not a problem of logic; that would be an epistymological problem or a fact finding problem.
Maybe you and Pakka can form a logic study group
However, the real problem is that regardless of whether the premises are true or false, some cannot identify logical fallacies in reaching the conclusions. Thats the really irritating problem.
Maybe we need a forum for only logical people. You could set it up that so we have cow roundup using logic questions and only those with high score could enter. Then we would have a council of wise men who could debate issues logically and solve many world problems. This would be a fine contribution Javaranch could make to the world.

Pakka Desi:
"There is no absolute. Your logic could be as absurd to somebody else as somebody else's logic is to you."
-- what if to read it as "your reasoning could be as absurd to somebody else as somebody else's reasoning is to you" -- is it Ok now? I suspect this is what Pakka *really* means (well, I can be wrong, of course) rather then to criticize your choice of formal-logical systems or failures in applying them. That your premises -- what you fed into your logical machine -- are wrong.
I understand that you believe there *are* absolutes, and whether you are right or not, this scares me.

But scared; very scared, for you are Absolutely right.

This is precisely what I heard from my birth, that there is the Absolute Truth, and that it's already written in certain books. "Marx' theory is omnipotent, because it is true". These are precisely absolutes, in the sake of what people were killed.
I've never seen more intolerant people than those who believes in "absolute truth".
[ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: Mapraputa Is ]

A is A. A is not B. I believe that, and I admit I am intolerant of those who claim A is B as Aristotle would say. When individuals and society
abandon logic and any pretense at rules or laws, all hope is gone. Abandoning logic does not lead to a more tolerant society. If people can never reason with each other, then the other alternative is the use of brute force. Chaos, anarchy, lawlessness, and the breakdown of society are not pretty sites but they do happen. That would be the result of total abandonment of logic.
Lead us not into that direction Mapraputa...
[ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: herb slocomb ]
Pakka Desi
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 11, 2002
Posts: 177
Originally posted by Jason Menard:

Freedom is better than servitude.

Yet, that's exactly what your society chose to have!


I'm just saying...it's right there!
frank davis
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 12, 2001
Posts: 1479
Originally posted by Ravish Kumar:

Zero symbol plays a major role in The Universal Computer.

How does zero have anything to do with syllogistic logic?
frank davis
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 12, 2001
Posts: 1479
Originally posted by Pakka Desi:

Yet, that's exactly what your society chose to have!

Pyschologically healthy humans choose freedom over slavery.
Pakka Desi
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 11, 2002
Posts: 177
Originally posted by Pakka Desi:
Ok let's just end this, Do you seriously believe that US had any interest in the well being of Afgn. people? Yes or No. I don't believe it.
Originally posted by Thomas Paul:
Yes and we still do. And I don't care what you believe.

1. Who is we? I guess you want to speak for all Americans.
2. As far as I am concerned there is no difference between your attitude and Taliban's attitude. But you claim a moral superiority because you think your values are better. Taliban thought so too. Both of you are fundamentalists.
Every time you make a statement, you prove my original point that US is not a lot different than AQ. Both are hell bent of spreading their values. Both use covert and overt techniques to achieve their goals. Of course, US is smarter than AQ because whatever they do, they "legalize" it. Law, as defined by the US, of course. Might is right.
San Su
Ranch Hand

Joined: Jul 06, 2001
Posts: 313
Originally posted by Thomas Paul:

I do not agree that a proxy war with the Soviet Union was more dangerous than a direct war with China. There was rally no possibility of the Soviets making the kind of threat you suggest. How would they back it up? By nuking Pakistan? That would have ended the world. The Soviets had way too much to lose to try to play that game.

IF they made some drastic steps like attacking pakistan, what would be the US response? going to nuclear war with Soviet to save Pakistan? and risking hundreds of millions of American lifes? Well, everyone had way too much to lose if there was a nuclear war between Soviet and US, not the Soviets alone like you think. They would have flattened your country and europe, and you would have flattened theirs and who knows what else would have continued. The americans were playing a dangerous game. It was way too risking than going to direct war with China at 1959 (they didnt even have nukes at that time, FYI).
R K Singh
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 15, 2001
Posts: 5371
Originally posted by herb slocomb:

How does zero have anything to do with syllogistic logic?

Who is talking abt syllogistic logic??
I am not talking and I dont think you can
frank davis
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 12, 2001
Posts: 1479
Originally posted by Ravish Kumar:

Who is talking abt syllogistic logic??
I am not talking and I dont think you can


Because of my education, when someone says logic to me, this is the first type of logic that comes into my mind. Regardless, whether you are talking about "fuzzy" logic, or syllogistic logic or some other type, what does your question about zero have to do with either of them. I don't get it
frank davis
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 12, 2001
Posts: 1479
Originally posted by Pakka Desi:

Every time you make a statement, you prove my original point that US is not a lot different than AQ.

I didn't realize it was current US policy to kill as many civilians as possible which is the AQ objective and manner of operating. But no doubt you have hundreads of examples out of the many thousands of US actions to support your case that this true, so please share them.
These moral equivalency arguments are disgusting. It is clear now what you mean by the "holier than thou" attitude of the US you mentioned in earlier posts. It because we dare to consider ourselves holier than AQ. Well, maybe we are holier. Logically that is a possiblity, correct? Factually, I think it is proven.
R K Singh
Ranch Hand

Joined: Oct 15, 2001
Posts: 5371
Originally posted by herb slocomb:

I don't get it

same here
BTW what do you mean by it
=======
It was the science of logic that helped the development of symbolic notational systems leading to computers
======
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 05, 2000
Posts: 13974
Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
Tom, this can be cultural difference at work, I did not know anybody can joke about this stuff.
You can't joke about the US? Or are you just upset because I included communism in with fascism.
Jason Menard
Sheriff

Joined: Nov 09, 2000
Posts: 6450
Originally posted by herb slocomb:
These moral equivalency arguments are disgusting.

But that's all he has. I could similarly make an effective argument about how India == Pakistan and the incredible negative effects both have on the world, but that doesn't necessarily mean it would have any more merit than the tripe you responded to.
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Originally posted by Thomas Paul:
You can't joke about the US? Or are you just upset because I included communism in with fascism.

I cannot/wouldn't joke about 9/11. I am upset because I used to respect you.
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 05, 2000
Posts: 13974
Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
I cannot/wouldn't joke about 9/11. I am upset because I used to respect you.

So your respect of me was lost because I joked that the US had no problem defeating fascism as a response to an anti-American comment about Americans being arrogant? I had thought that the irony would have been clear. Anyway, whatever. :roll:
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Tom, if I offended somebody I respect and that person let me know, I apologize. After that, I can try to explain that I was misunderstood etc. As easy as that. If instead I am trying to imply some "hidden" reasons in why that person was offended... Well.
As for "communism", it does bother me that a lot of what is saying in this forum about communism is gross oversimplification. But I do not want even start this. :roll:
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Originally posted by herb slocomb:
Or maybe you missed the point I said about it being based on premises. "Based" meaning relied upon, or providing a foundation for. Meaning that if your premises are wrong, there obviously will be a problem with your conclusions. This is so elementary I hope I am missing your point, which I hope is merely a restatement of my statement on logic being based on premises. Faulty premises are not a problem of logic; that would be an epistymological problem or a fact finding problem.

Herb, the words you quote were posted as a response to another statement of your. As for "Or maybe you missed the point I said about it being based on premises", here is your statement:
herb slocomb : Conclusions can be proven absolutely true or false based on the premises and the reasoning used to arrive at the results.
here is mine:
Herb, what about Probabilistic Logic?
-- I was responding to "absolutely true or false", really.
This is so elementary I hope I am missing your point
My point was that it's so easy to nitpick somebody's words, and it's (apparently) much harder to understand what your interlocutor really mean to say. This requires some degree of sympathy, rather than hostility. My another point was that when we are talking about society or politics, the problem as often can be in vague definitions or subjective opinions, not to mention high degree of emotions, as in logic.
Maybe you and Pakka can form a logic study group
Maybe. I would like to.
However, the real problem is that regardless of whether the premises are true or false, some cannot identify logical fallacies in reaching the conclusions. Thats the really irritating problem.
Well, help them. Without sarcastic tone - it doesn't help.
A is A. A is not B. I believe that, and I admit I am intolerant of those who claim A is B as Aristotle would say. When individuals and society
abandon logic and any pretense at rules or laws, all hope is gone. Abandoning logic does not lead to a more tolerant society. If people can never reason with each other, then the other alternative is the use of brute force. Chaos, anarchy, lawlessness, and the breakdown of society are not pretty sites but they do happen. That would be the result of total abandonment of logic..

I could re-use your words "this is so elementary I hope I am missing your point..." but I wont.
Thomas Paul
mister krabs
Ranch Hand

Joined: May 05, 2000
Posts: 13974
Originally posted by Mapraputa Is:
Tom, if I offended somebody I respect and that person let me know, I apologize. After that, I can try to explain that I was misunderstood etc. As easy as that. If instead I am trying to imply some "hidden" reasons in why that person was offended... Well.
As for "communism", it does bother me that a lot of what is saying in this forum about communism is gross oversimplification. But I do not want even start this. :roll:

Map, if what I said offended you I am sorry. It was meant as a joke; a self-mocking comment about American arrogance.
As for communism, I'm not aware that we have actually discussed communism in this forum.
Mapraputa Is
Leverager of our synergies
Sheriff

Joined: Aug 26, 2000
Posts: 10065
Tom, thanks.
Can we now close this thread?
 
permaculture playing cards
 
subject: On destroying fascism