mocked? There is a deep grumble among the most pleasant looking/acting
citizens these days. And I am suspicious of any media analysis as they
have their own axe to grind.
On Aug 19, 6:01 am, paradox <eadohe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Dont think i can, Lee; at least not without embarking on some very
> lengthy and possibly very boring philosophical exploration :)
>
> I do think Orn's right on this one though; we have emotionally
> distinctive senses when we think of "good" or "bad".
>
> Far as the looting is concerned, i have heard in the media some quite
> alarming expressions of emotion towards children and the young
> involved in the disorder; the vitriol suggests to me that there is a
> great deal of underlying frustration and anger in society at the
> moment for which the disorder has acted pretty much as a "lightning
> rod". I certainly hope thats the case, or else the looting may be just
> the start of something more ugly and protracted.
>
> The question of sentencing is unsurprising, if unseemly, in my
> opinion; "political" interpretations of the law usually are.
>
> On Aug 16, 12:09 pm, Lee Douglas <leerevdoug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Paradox, yes agreat frind of mine tells me the same sorta thing, that
> > morality without emotion is somehow lacking. It is partly due to his
> > words and my respect for him that I have started this thread.
>
> > However as Rigsy points out to evict a looter from his council home
> > for his looting does not adress any problems, nor does it serve as
> > adiquate punishment, and would I think only make things worse.
>
> > This course of actions is a fine example of thinking/talking about
> > morality whilst angry, and is to my mind no good at all.
>
> > I maintian that morality is best sreved without emotions attached, can
> > you show my why I am wrong?
>
> > On Aug 14, 5:31 pm, paradox <eadohe...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Deep question, Lee; not an easy one. One who suffers injury must have
> > > the right of redress, be that restitution or retribution, or else we
> > > live in Hobbes's state of nature. The question of balance and
> > > proportionality is the proper remit of the law courts and great minds.
> > > Where the injury in question falls outside the purview of the
> > > collective good or the legal framework to that end, morality and
> > > values must act to constrain the individual in respect of balance and
> > > proportionality; that is why it's so very vital that we understand
> > > what we do when we tinker with the foundations and structures of a
> > > society's moral compass.
>
> > > Personally, i've always felt that emotions are the fuel for the
> > > directed mind.
>
> > > On Aug 12, 1:28 pm, Lee Douglas <leerevdoug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > So as we should all know we have had quite a week of it here in the
> > > > UK. Facebook and many other web places have been inundated with all
> > > > sorts of sillyness.
>
> > > > Calls to bring back national service, calls to evict those found
> > > > guilty of the rioting and looting, calls to stop their benifits. I
> > > > have witnessed some of my good good friends spew out all mannor of
> > > > sillyness in their anger.
>
> > > > I have procliamed in the past that all questions of morality are
> > > > better served sans emotions and I see much this week that has only
> > > > firmed this view.
>
> > > > In order to discover though the validity of this thought tell me do
> > > > you agree, or not and why? People of ME sway my opinion with your
> > > > wise words.
>
> > > > What good can come of deciding upon a course of action whilst holding
> > > > onto your anger?
>
> > > > I ask of course as a self confessed recovered angry man.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário