h1

Copy overs 3

04/24/2008

September 15, 2007 – Saturday

Observing Bullies

I have noticed, and I do not believe I am the only one, that bullies have a flawed understanding of what maturity is, as well as what words actually mean.

To the deluded mind of the bully, stupid is synonymous with ignorant.

In relation to the above, they also seem to think that anything they believe to be common knowledge must be, in fact, common knowledge, therefor if you do not know what they do, you must be an idiot because you would have to be pretty stupid to not to know the equivalent of what they do, to whatever level their knowledge extends. I suppose it is rather humbling that they do not think they know more general information than the those whom they insult.

And remember the rule of maturity: After you belittle someone, tell them to get over it. Because hypocrisy in civility is no where near as bad as defending yourself or seeking revenge. Maturity asks you why you cannot take a joke. And the answer is because you are too stupid to understand that you should get over being abused and drop silly notions of punishment and revenge. Don’t forget, you moron, that it is not a good move to try to talk out your disagreements, because only wimps do that, and you don’t want to be a stupid wimp, do you? Well, too late! You are a pansy! Now let’s have a laugh while I stomp your privates and spit in your face.

———-

September 15, 2007 – Saturday

Worse for the psyche?

One of the arguments against how the “war” on terrorism is being handled I have seen is that we spend too much of our focus on terrorism when there are worse statistically deadly matters, such as earthquakes and car accidents. But that does not surprise me. I think it is because, as I believe, those other events, being usually without malice of intent, spawn sadness more than hate. Acts of violence are willful and mallicious. They give rise to anger more than sadness, and anger is harder to cope with. The forces behind them are known and might let their intent to be known. Forces behind natural occurrences are conceptual. And acts of violence are feared; they have known intent of mallicious harm behind them. The difference in nature and motive might be irrelevant, even false, to some logicians, but they are of great importance to me.

Is it necessary to down play one issue to protest the inadequacy of concern for the other?

———————————————————————–

September 15, 2007 – Saturday

Irrational Fear and the Civilised

 

There are two old maxims which state man fears the unknown and what he cannot understand. They seem to be often used as indictments of man for his supposedly destructive nature due to the irrationality and impatience of his mind.

I may be terribly misunderstanding this issue, but I am continuing on regardless.

While man’s nature may be destructive, I believe it is a fact which the unknown is not germane to by default. I believe the maxim that refers to an absence of understanding is more fair.


Yes, I am being semantic, perhaps fallaciously, but my basis is in the impression I have gotten from the maxims in the context of judging man.

I see the unknown almost as if it were an entity. And I see understanding as a matter of circumstance and level of urgency.

I contend that man is therefor not uncivil if his nature is to destroy the unknown, but by his misunderstanding of the need to destroy in the context of his circumstance. I find it difficult to believe man’s nature is to kill and murder things unknown to him with no basis in the reality, or perceived reality, of the situations around him.

The unknown is not always threatening by intent on its part, but because of man’s ignorance of its intent and possibly of his understanding of the surrounding circumstances, its destruction may be necessary, and fears are not always baseless. So circumstances can be just cause to destroy.

Destruction is bad when the reasons therefor have nothing to do with the preservation of a greater good, or, if one is so accepting, in some circumstances when it is a so called selfish good. Man is uncivil because of unecessary destruction. Knowing when it is necessary is the major question.

——————————————————————————————-

Maybe more “classic” stuff later.

 

 

 
 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: