News:

The default theme for this site has been updated. For further information, please take a look at the announcement regarding HAF changing its default theme.

Main Menu

The Asmo's Trump Thread

Started by Asmodean, July 17, 2017, 03:42:47 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Asmodean

Quote from: Davin on July 21, 2017, 03:24:43 PM
Not all Muslims oppress women, and it's not like they are the only religion to do so.
...

QuoteI mean, Islam is just as shitty as any other religion and many manage to be decent people in spite of the religion just like Christians have done
...

QuoteSo how about we stop making it about the religion, and start making it about the people?
...No.

QuoteWell that certainly was a lot of stuff. What I didn't see though, is something along the lines of and argument for why one shouldn't treat a person like any other person just because they are a Muslim.
I suggest you actually read it then. Your question was answered early on.

QuoteThere is a strategy, but they are still tantrums.
Make your case, or cede the point - I've made mine.

QuoteI consider all of humanity to be my society, so it is a problem for my society.
Not how the world works.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on July 25, 2013, 08:18:52 PM
In Asmo's grey lump,
wrath and dark clouds gather force.
Luxembourg trembles.

Davin

Quote from: Asmodean on July 22, 2017, 11:04:28 AM
...No.
...Yes.

Quote from: Asmodean
QuoteWell that certainly was a lot of stuff. What I didn't see though, is something along the lines of and argument for why one shouldn't treat a person like any other person just because they are a Muslim.
I suggest you actually read it then. Your question was answered early on.
Unfortunately for me, I did read the whole thing, it didn't address my point at all.

Quote from: Asmodean
QuoteThere is a strategy, but they are still tantrums.
Make your case, or cede the point - I've made mine.
?? Your case doesn't mean that he's not acting out tantrums, tantrums and strategies are not mutually exclusive.

Quote from: Asmodean
QuoteI consider all of humanity to be my society, so it is a problem for my society.
Not how the world works.
Make your case or cede to the point. :lol: See how stupid that looks?

It is how the world works though, because in the world I get to decide how and what I consider. But if you need more, are we not communicating as a community across borders here on this site? The world is increasingly becoming a unified world more and more. The people (in general, because there are still a bunch of xenophobes), are giving less and less of a shit. On the government level, trade deals are being made across countries the reduce the cost of importing goods and many of those include migration rules. So overall, things are moving towards a unified world.

And even without all that, the world doesn't get to dictate who I consider to be a part of my community.
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Asmodean

Quote
Yes.
No.

QuoteUnfortunately for me, I did read the whole thing, it didn't address my point at all.
It did. Here, I'll even quote it for you;
Quote from: The AsmoI'll answer your question as a European, as I suspect Tom sees this issue through the EU migrant crisis lens too.

Ok... General obviousness first. I treat you as a human being, and yet we are at each other's throats pretty much every time one of us opens his mouth. It's not a good example. What I'm trying to illustrate is that you can, in fact, not pander to people and still not rob them of their humanity, so to speak.

Then there is the question of rhetoric. "Muslim" can, and often in these discussion, should be viewed as a first-degree approximation rather than a direct reference to religion. When anti-immigration... No, let me rephrase that somehow, it's not immigration as such that is often seen as a problem... Gah. Fine. Whatever. When anti-Muslim-refugee elements chant "Build that wall!" and places like Romania do just that, the underlying issue is that Europe does not have a place for the sheer number of people trying to get in.


QuoteYour case doesn't mean that he's not acting out tantrums, tantrums and strategies are not mutually exclusive.
No, of course reactive responses are not mutually exclusive from proactive responses, in much the same way as actions are nut mutually exclusive from reactions.

Yes, Russia's brief stint in Georgia may have been reactionary to their treatment of South Abkhazistan or what have you, if one were to subscribe to the point of view that Russia actually gives a fuck about such matters.

Yes, Russia's hullabaloo in the Ukraine may have been highly opportunistic, but opportunism does not signify some sort of emotional bullshit. In fact, it reeks of pretty cold calculation all the way here.

Yes, Russia's support of populist elements in Europe is a reaction to the EU leadership being unfriendly with Moscow. As far as reactions go, that seems effective.

And yes, my case for it being something, which does not let itself be categorized as tantrums, was made, and not half-badly. I'll try using some regressive vocabulary next time though.

Quote
Make your case or cede to the point. :lol: See how stupid that looks?
:smug:

The world is not your society because the world is not unified by the same principles, which a society make. Societies around the world are governed by different, sometimes opposing laws, different moral codes, they place different value on human life, expect different things from their members, value different things in themselves, their members and the world in general, they have different approaches to The Great Outside™ and so on.

So yes, you may think me a part of your society - I will still put you in a fire pit and eat you for being an outsider. Well, not an actual fire pit - I'm way past cannibalism and am not really a violent type. I'll get back to spinning this metaphor in part two and three of making my case. Will you be making yours on my point, I wonder..? The one where I asked you to..?

Quote
But if you need more, are we not communicating as a community across borders here on this site? The world is increasingly becoming a unified world more and more. The people (in general, because there are still a bunch of xenophobes), are giving less and less of a shit. On the government level, trade deals are being made across countries the reduce the cost of importing goods and many of those include migration rules. So overall, things are moving towards a unified world.
A case for globalization? Not bad... In fact, I think this is the best case your side of the issue can make. However, the globalists are struggling with the tribes becoming more specialized and issue-oriented rather than dissolving. New borderlines are being drawn across political and cultural rather than physical landscape. Eventually, "we" on this site may well consider ourselves to be a society of sorts - we have internal rules and some exclusivity of membership and we do act and are acted upon "The Great Outside" but... A tribe is a tribe, and even we have swirled an outsider or two on a spit.

Quote
And even without all that, the world doesn't get to dictate who I consider to be a part of my community.
I sort-of admire the use of the word "consider" in masking the individualistic naïveté of this statement. (And I do speak as an individualist of sorts) The world gets to dictate pretty much every fucking thing in your life. That's not to say that the choices you make are of no profound importance, but should the world decide to reward you for embracing someone as your own by detonating their explosive underpants, well... That does happen with an alarming frequency.

So yes, consider who you want to be what you want. In this case, however, you are simply wrong to.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on July 25, 2013, 08:18:52 PM
In Asmo's grey lump,
wrath and dark clouds gather force.
Luxembourg trembles.

Davin

Quote from: Asmodean on July 25, 2017, 12:57:03 PM
No.
Yes.

Quote from: Asmodean
QuoteUnfortunately for me, I did read the whole thing, it didn't address my point at all.
It did. Here, I'll even quote it for you;
Quote from: The AsmoI'll answer your question as a European, as I suspect Tom sees this issue through the EU migrant crisis lens too.

Ok... General obviousness first. I treat you as a human being, and yet we are at each other's throats pretty much every time one of us opens his mouth. It's not a good example. What I'm trying to illustrate is that you can, in fact, not pander to people and still not rob them of their humanity, so to speak.

Then there is the question of rhetoric. "Muslim" can, and often in these discussion, should be viewed as a first-degree approximation rather than a direct reference to religion. When anti-immigration... No, let me rephrase that somehow, it's not immigration as such that is often seen as a problem... Gah. Fine. Whatever. When anti-Muslim-refugee elements chant "Build that wall!" and places like Romania do just that, the underlying issue is that Europe does not have a place for the sheer number of people trying to get in.
That doesn't answer my question.

Quote from: Asmodean
QuoteYour case doesn't mean that he's not acting out tantrums, tantrums and strategies are not mutually exclusive.
No, of course reactive responses are not mutually exclusive from proactive responses, in much the same way as actions are nut mutually exclusive from reactions.
Great.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
Make your case or cede to the point. :lol: See how stupid that looks?
:smug:

The world is not your society because the world is not unified by the same principles[...]
None of that matters to my point.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
But if you need more, are we not communicating as a community across borders here on this site? The world is increasingly becoming a unified world more and more. The people (in general, because there are still a bunch of xenophobes), are giving less and less of a shit. On the government level, trade deals are being made across countries the reduce the cost of importing goods and many of those include migration rules. So overall, things are moving towards a unified world.
A case for globalization? Not bad...
It is happening, not much of a case as it is an acceptance of what is going on.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
And even without all that, the world doesn't get to dictate who I consider to be a part of my community.
I sort-of admire the use of the word "consider" in masking the individualistic naïveté of this statement.
Why do you resort to personal attacks? What I describe is how communities work. People decide who is part of their community and who is not. People rarely ever agree exactly on who is on what side of the arbitrary lines. Immigrants to America think they are part of this country's community, most right wingers don't think they are.

Quote from: Asmodean(And I do speak as an individualist of sorts) The world gets to dictate pretty much every fucking thing in your life.
It doesn't. See? It's not dictating what I think. It is true that there are a lot of things out of my control, but there are also a lot of things under my control. The world dictates many things, but not everything.

Quote from: AsmodeanSo yes, consider who you want to be what you want. In this case, however, you are simply wrong to.
I think that instead of making the case you think you've made, you misrepresented reality too much for me to accept what I suppose was meant to be your kill statement. And instead of cinching it in the end, you've instead tripped up half way down the track.
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Asmodean

I do not make kill statements unless bored or trying to accomplish something. Those tend to close arguments, which is usually against my interests.

Now, show me the personal attack, will you? Because I can see reporting my own posts as getting really tiresome for everyone involved really quickly.

I shall come back to this after this matter is resolved.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on July 25, 2013, 08:18:52 PM
In Asmo's grey lump,
wrath and dark clouds gather force.
Luxembourg trembles.

Davin

Quote from: Asmodean on July 25, 2017, 04:41:15 PM
Now, show me the personal attack, will you? Because I can see reporting my own posts as getting really tiresome for everyone involved really quickly.
Do you know what the word "naivete" means? I mean, it's possible that it wasn't an intentional attack on me instead of my argument and you just don't know what the word means.

Quote from: AsmodeanI shall come back to this after this matter is resolved.
Do whatever you want to do, I don't mind one way or the other. Personal attacks do not bother me, but if you're going to engage in them, then I might as well too..
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Asmodean

Yes, I know what the word means. A lack of wisdom. A narrowness of perspective, in some sense. It refers to the statement you made.

Really, though, I am not even walking the line here. Yes, I use loaded terms, but I do provide context within which they are to be understood.

Regardless, my apologies if offense was taken.

Now, to find a proper keyboard and address a point or two...
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on July 25, 2013, 08:18:52 PM
In Asmo's grey lump,
wrath and dark clouds gather force.
Luxembourg trembles.

Davin

Quote from: Asmodean on July 25, 2017, 05:30:04 PM
Yes, I know what the word means. A lack of wisdom. A narrowness of perspective, in some sense. It refers to the statement you made.
How does that apply to the statement and not the one making the statement?

Quote from: AsmodeanRegardless, my apologies if offense was taken.
I already said I didn't care, I'm wondering about the rules of engagement. I was under the impression that personal attacks were off the table, but if you're going to use them, then I will as well.
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Asmodean

Still on my phone, so not quoting properly.

To answer your first question, smart people can make stupid statements and wise people can make naïve statements. All people can, just like all people can hold silly beliefs. You must have seen, for instance, that neither intelligence nor wisdom are surefire bars to faith in the divine.

No, I was not talking about the person behind the statement. I don't know you beyond your HAF persona, so how could I?

I do not, nor did I attack you. How you conduct yourself in an argument in which I have a lead role, is not something I can allow myself to judge. Moderate yourself - or do not. I'm not asking you to do so on my account though. I'm not made of glass, especially on the internet.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on July 25, 2013, 08:18:52 PM
In Asmo's grey lump,
wrath and dark clouds gather force.
Luxembourg trembles.

Davin

Quote from: Asmodean on July 25, 2017, 08:19:01 PM
To answer your first question, smart people can make stupid statements and wise people can make naïve statements. All people can, just like all people can hold silly beliefs. You must have seen, for instance, that neither intelligence nor wisdom are surefire bars to faith in the divine.

No, I was not talking about the person behind the statement. I don't know you beyond your HAF persona, so how could I?
A lack of knowledge of a person does not prevent people from committing ad hominems against them. How does saying that my statement shows "A lack of wisdom. A narrowness of perspective, in some sense." not addressing me? You're literally saying that (even if it's limited to that one statement), that I am "lacking wisdom, and/or have a narrowness of perspective." How can a statement itself be "naive?" Those terms do not apply to statements, those terms apply to people.

Quote from: AsmodeanI do not, nor did I attack you.
You did. Statements cannot themselves be naive, while people making statements can.

Quote from: AsmodeanHow you conduct yourself in an argument in which I have a lead role, is not something I can allow myself to judge. Moderate yourself - or do not. I'm not asking you to do so on my account though. I'm not made of glass, especially on the internet.
No worries then. I'll conduct myself by what is permitted.
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Asmodean

Phone, lack of inches, same disclaimer for not quoting.

I just wanted to answer that one can, in fact, imbue inanimate and even immaterial objects with qualities normally reserved for people, naīveté among them.

Of course what you say reflects on you. My description of what you say though, does not. Me calling a statement asinine is not me calling its author an ass. Me calling a statement true does not imply that the author is not a liar (beyond the one instance, obviously, in both cases) There is a pattern there. I don't care enough to word myself carefully or delicately. This is not that sort of conversation. That doesn't mean that anything that comes off my fingertips has any meaning beyond or in stead of that which was provided in its context. And if at all ambiguous, I am nearly always happy to clarify and defend both my position and it's associated wording.

So yeah... I don't see a problem. If you do, propose a solution and I will consider it. If it costs me few calories, I will implement it - for a time at least.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on July 25, 2013, 08:18:52 PM
In Asmo's grey lump,
wrath and dark clouds gather force.
Luxembourg trembles.

Firebird

"Great, replace one book about an abusive, needy asshole with another." - Will (moderator) on replacing hotel Bibles with "Fifty Shades of Grey"

Asmodean

Yes, yes... Asmo vs. Davin season 83 is still as fascinating as the day it first aired...  :P
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on July 25, 2013, 08:18:52 PM
In Asmo's grey lump,
wrath and dark clouds gather force.
Luxembourg trembles.

Davin

Quote from: Asmodean on July 26, 2017, 12:37:03 AM
I just wanted to answer that one can, in fact, imbue inanimate and even immaterial objects with qualities normally reserved for people, naīveté among them.
So you're not saying that the statement displays a narrow viewpoint or lack of knowledge?

I don't see how you knowing the meaning of the word, and then applying that word to what I said, is not you telling me that my statement is wrong not because of what I said, but because you erroneously think that I have a narrow viewpoint and/or I lack knowledge. Both of which could be true. But that's not the problem. The problem is that you're committing an ad hominem fallacy in that instead of attacking what I said, you've said that my statement is naive which implies that what is said is not worth addressing because it has a narrow viewpoint and/or is lacking knowledge.

If you try to apply having a narrow perspective or a lack of knowledge to a statement, well that doesn't make any sense.
Always question all authorities because the authority you don't question is the most dangerous... except me, never question me.

Tom62

The universe never did make sense; I suspect it was built on government contract.
Robert A. Heinlein