I'm not accusing you of any particular brand of beliefs. I was just debating what I was willing to debate with the topic at hand. I won't contribute to how to ruin a life, but I will debate whether or not it is right to do so, etc...sinnik wrote:
If you read some of my other posts and I think you'll see where I stand on the subject of rape/abuse of any kind.
The discussion of the morality though comes hand in haned with what is being done, and as such it needs to be discussed on a theoretical bases given the scenario it's applied to..
kinda what I meant to say in the op..
I guess what I mean to say is I'm trying to put an idea out there as devils advocate and see where it goes - don't take it too literally and just discuss.
Dunno guess i'm just trying to put a compass out on the forum and see which way it ends up pointing
beliefs are subjective thats where the debate come in .. Lets face every body does it in a minor way - It's our nature/course of evolution it's why socialism and altruism in their pure philisophical forms are so appealing- just unfortunately not practicle - it's not the nature of the animals we are and we don't have the texhnology to put it into place. (lol just think startreck)
So instead of debating wethr to debate plunge in and see where it goes..?
So instead of debating wethr to debate plunge in and see where it goes..?
I might not have explained myself clearly...sinnik wrote:
beliefs are subjective thats where the debate come in .. Lets face every body does it in a minor way - It's our nature/course of evolution it's why socialism and altruism in their pure philisophical forms are so appealing- just unfortunately not practicle - it's not the nature of the animals we are and we don't have the texhnology to put it into place. (lol just think startreck)
So instead of debating wethr to debate plunge in and see where it goes..?
I won't contribute to a discussion of how to ruin another person's life, but I will discuss the morality of those actions, etc... I am not talking about debating whether or not to debate.
Easiest question ever
Say he has WMD and supports Al Qaeda
Say he has WMD and supports Al Qaeda
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
wtf?
ƒ³
I've got no fucking clue what you just said.
If you meant me:wtf?
The question in the OP was 'If you had the power to try and controll some one's life how would you go about it..'
Answer 'Say he has WMD and supports Al Qaeda'
Paedo is just too easy.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
I meant the creepy OPDilbert_X wrote:
If you meant me:wtf?
The question in the OP was 'If you had the power to try and controll some one's life how would you go about it..'
Answer 'Say he has WMD and supports Al Qaeda'
Paedo is just too easy.
your post I found quite funny tbh (and true...)
ƒ³
Technically if you are under 18 and jerk off you are a child molester.
The whole phenomenon of 'trial by media' is built on this. Wasn't it Mark Twain who said "a lie will travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting it's clothes on"?Turquoise wrote:
Sinnik (who should be named Cynic) makes a lot of good points here.
In fact, he's basically explained exactly how politics really work during campaigns. Make up a bad enough story about someone that is still believable, and it's worth more than actual dirt found on your opponent. The Swift Boat bullshit of the last election is a perfect example of this, and it's fitting that McCain was connected to that propaganda machine.
Great quote... This was also shown by a rape trial that occurred in reference to accusations made against the Duke University Lacrosse team recently. Duke is a prestigious private university in Durham, NC (only about 2 hours from where I live), but after the media frenzy over this (the students being white and the accuser being black), it turned out the accuser was lying and the DA was just using the case as fodder for reelection.Braddock wrote:
The whole phenomenon of 'trial by media' is built on this. Wasn't it Mark Twain who said "a lie will travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting it's clothes on"?Turquoise wrote:
Sinnik (who should be named Cynic) makes a lot of good points here.
In fact, he's basically explained exactly how politics really work during campaigns. Make up a bad enough story about someone that is still believable, and it's worth more than actual dirt found on your opponent. The Swift Boat bullshit of the last election is a perfect example of this, and it's fitting that McCain was connected to that propaganda machine.
Despite being cleared of all charges, the students lost several job offers (they were going to exit college soon) and have forever had their reputations tarnished because of the media's guilty until proven innocent attitude.
Exactly and on a political vein - what exactly is the job of a good spin doctor again.. If dirt comes up on your guy then find a way to make it stick to some one else, no?
It's all the same thing - playing fair may help you sleep at night but do you really think that the top earners in companies got there, and stay there, by just honesty and hard work alone?
It's all the same thing - playing fair may help you sleep at night but do you really think that the top earners in companies got there, and stay there, by just honesty and hard work alone?
too many big words, didnt read.
15 more years! 15 more years!
Did you ever hear of the theory that some politicians and corporate executives are sociopaths? I have seen this thrown around on slashdot before, and a quick search sums up the sentiment:sinnik wrote:
Exactly and on a political vein - what exactly is the job of a good spin doctor again.. If dirt comes up on your guy then find a way to make it stick to some one else, no?
It's all the same thing - playing fair may help you sleep at night but do you really think that the top earners in companies got there, and stay there, by just honesty and hard work alone?
(That is a direct copy-paste, I'm not sure what the odd symbols mean)I was reading something on Slashdot about HP dumping Board member George Keyworth for leaking things to the press. The issue wasn’t that he was dumped, it was that pretexting was used to get his phone records.
This being Slashdot, the idea that all CEOs and politicians are sociopaths quickly came up. This is how it supposedly works: no normal human being would be willing to cut jobs, sell out their colleagues, keep saying what people want to hear with no guilt from lying, and otherwise do the things that lands you on top of the corporate ladder or in Congress. In order to be successful at those things, you have to lack empathy with others – hence, you’re a sociopath. Very intelligent sociopaths can be surprisingly charismatic – they learn can learn, and exploit, social graces even if they don’t feel bound to them.
What you describe fits into that 'model' pretty well, where someone would go out of their way to undermine another in order to further their own career/life.