Hey, we want to be part of the hate!
POSTED BY: dreamtrove
UPDATED: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 02:14
VIEWED: 18566
PAGE 18 of 23
Oh and despite the propagandist element, Hero was a very good film. And thereby I prove my own point. Maybe. 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
No, DT, it's all spoon. Everywhere you look.
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SPOOOON!!!!
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Typically, good defines itself, and then evil, as that which opposes it (The US or Israel vs. radical Islam, or, if you prefer, the other way around.) Once evil has been identified, stopping it is all important. If anything becomes ever all important, than any means can be considered acceptable to that ends, which is the concept that Machiavelli, who would have hated to be remembered for it, has become synonymous.
Yes, he would have hated how he was remembered,because he wasn't concerned with good or evil, but power and how to keep it. The Prince is a pragmatist's guide on how not to be overthrown, but it was always considered scandalous (even though it has been widely used by many leaders) because it pays no lip service to the morality of good vs evil.
The concept of G v E has been used to dress up the pragmatics of war, and why countries (or states, principalities etc) go to war. Basically, something is needed to pretty up the reality for those fighting (or sending their sons to fight). How much easier is it to contemplate putting your life on the line, accepting that your country is at war if you are combatting evil. Better than "actually we just want to control the oil" or 'we want their land" or any other of the real, economic pragmatic reasons that people fight. Better still if god is on your side.
If you don't pretty it up, its pretty hard for people to palate the consequences of war and you don't do it well enough and the population has a sense that they are once again being used as cannon fodder for the sake of someone else's greed or hubris, you may well find your population turning on you in outrage and disgust ie the 1917 Russian revolution.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
MasonsDaughter,
You are, again, spot on. esp. re WWII.
Right about everything, spare one:
My point was that the Prince was a commission work, not his personal beliefs, in fact, he would have said, contrary to his personal beliefs. As would Zhang Yimou, who is still alive so we could ask, but I already know. Yet, the writing of a work of propaganda to save ones own progressive work, is, by itself, a means to an end, thus they are both Machiavellians in the end.
HK, you see spoons, does not mean that they are there. It's your belief. The question here is whether or not that belief is good for ourselves. I'm not prone to Matrix references, but there are some definite good ones.
Frem,
Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant. Elvenlied, of course. Not the spoon thing. I think the film, if I dub it so, wins the point. Killers are made, not born.
Select to view spoiler:
The icing on the cake was that at the end, it was Lucy, and not the alternate personality of Lucy.
Of course, a lot of things I could call long before they happened, but that comes with consuming this sort of thing. I didn't waste time, and, oh, catchy tune.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
HK, you see spoons, does not mean that they are there. It's your belief. The question here is whether or not that belief is good for ourselves. I'm not prone to Matrix references, but there are some definite good ones.
DT, I know you were quipping to begin with (though, honestly, I don't quite grok the fullness of what it hadda do with my first post), so maybe this isn't worth going into, but you're soundin' awful serious with this post so I will say.
I don't see spoons, the singular "spoon" in my last post was not a typo. Your/the Matrix's "There is no spoon" presents the old Asiatic obsession with Nothingness and I was countering that orientation with my own Wicco-Shamanistic (I just made that word up) obsession with Imminence/Fullness/Presence. No more a belief than your Nothingness. Yin to your yang, talking about the same thing but seen from the other side.
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
What a perfect display of concept.
One sees the front of the paper, one sees it from the back, and yet another sees it from the edge.
Anyhows..
Quote:
Killers are made, not born.
That's exactly my point, and part of the reason I study the work of Andrew Vachss, Alice Miller and Bruce D Perry - cause the process by which they are created is known, and *can* be fouled or mitigated to where you do NOT end up with a Killer.
Ergo, I strike before the process is complete and sandbag it, and with limited resources the best point of intervention for maximum gain is places that practically create em by assembly line - i.e. behavior mod and boot camp facilities.
Which, of course leads in to how to deprive whatever powers that be of high quality triggermen, does it not ?
"In other times, evil would be fought by good, but in times like these, it is best fought with another kind of evil..."
Aereon - Chronicles of Riddick intro
-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:So your read on the situation is Finn's "treatment" for evil is death"
Somewhere up above, Finn commented to AgentRouka, correct me if I'm wrong, "you accept the symptoms, but not the diagnosis" of evil. I find his terminology very telling. It implies that "evil" can exist within an individual person. Like all diagnoses it also cries out for a treatment and the treatment, if I'm not mistaken, in the world view of a man like Finn is something like murder. "Evil" in Finn Land is that characteristic that forfeits a person his or her right to life.
Well, Finn? Is this a correct interpretation?
---------------------------------
Let's party like its 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I'd say that 96% of killers are neurotypical (NT) and are made that way be circumstance. But 4% are born that way and are not retrieved by circumstance.
Killers are made, not born.
---------------------------------
Let's party like its 1929.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Not completely.
Originally posted by SignyM:
Well, Finn? Is this a correct interpretation?
But it’s interesting to note that both you and HK seem to agree with the Christian interpretation of Original Sin. You seem to attribute the Ted Bundy’s of the world to the “lizard brain,” which everyone has. Or every human is capable evil. HK argues that evil is a part of a dichotomy. That both good and evil exist. These are not novel ideas. They have been around for thousands of years.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME