Anders Breivik and Europe

Mark Question · **Joined:** Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:20 am **Posts:** 513

chaz wyman wrote:

Mark Question wrote:

does uk queen-people in their island have it too? "a definitive 'way of life' that needs preserving against some assumed attack by relativism."? "There are only the issues; freedom, liberty, welfare and community."? sounds like you have too?

Is this garbled contribution supposed to mean something?

What is meant by 'uk queen-people'?

lets put it more simple way: united kingdom ruled by queen, ring a bell? or are you irish or whiskey in the skirt-people? come on! relax a minute.

do you, where ever you live, have it there too. something, anything at all that you like to preserve? or why you wrote your contribution "There are only the issues; freedom, liberty, welfare and community."? does it mean anything or everything? are you relativist? try not to hide behind grammar.

chaz wyman · **Joined:** Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm **Posts:** 10592

Mark Question wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

Mark Question wrote:

does uk queen-people in their island have it too? "a definitive 'way of life' that needs preserving against some assumed attack by relativism."? "There are only the issues; freedom, liberty, welfare and community."? sounds like you have too?

Is this garbled contribution supposed to mean something?

What is meant by 'uk queen-people'?

lets put it more simple way: united kingdom ruled by queen, ring a bell? or are you irish or whiskey in the skirt-people? come on! relax a minute.

No, the Queen does not 'rule' in any sense. Personally I regard her as a parasite scrounger. I live in the UK.

do you, where ever you live, have it there too. something,

... "it", "something"... you are confused because you con't know what you are talking about.

anything at all that you like to preserve? or why you wrote your contribution "There are only the issues; freedom, liberty, welfare and community."? does it mean anything or everything? are you relativist? try not to hide behind grammar.

Are you actually asking me a question of some kind? The things I wish to promote and preserve have very little to do with where I live. Why don't you get your head out of your arse and see what is all around you?

Mark Question · **Joined:** Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:20 am **Posts:** 513

ok. i try to write even more simple way:

chaz wyman wrote:

you are confused because you con't know what you are talking about.

are you trying to hypnotize me? or dreaming? avoiding the question? all that?

Quote:

Are you actually asking me a question of some kind? The things I wish to promote and preserve have very little to do with where I live. Why don't you get your head out of your arse and see what is all around you?

cool down, read and think these:
if you wish to promote and preserve something, then you are not relativist?
is your country where you live, promoting and preserving something too? have your country a queen?
or what you mean about relativism, in this sentence?: ""My country" as you call it does not have a definitive 'way of life' that needs preserving against some assumed attack by relativism." and in this context?: "How does it feel seeing your country and way of life being washed away by the relativist absurdist views of your nations?"? did you answered to that sentence like that or not? why i feel like an criminal investigator with you? start speaking! its lot easier that way.

chaz wyman · **Joined:** Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm **Posts:** 10592

Mark Question wrote:

ok. i try to write even more simple way:

chaz wyman wrote:

you are confused because you con't know what you are talking about.

are you trying to hypnotize me? or dreaming? avoiding the question? all that?

Quote:

Are you actually asking me a question of some kind? The things I wish to promote and preserve have very little to do with where I live. Why don't you get your head out of your arse and see what is all around you?

cool down, read and think these:
if you wish to promote and preserve something, then you are not relativist?

Being a relativist is not a exhaustive appellation. I might be one on some issues and not on others. I doubt that there are true universal moral and social laws, but that does not mean that I cannot choose a set I personally believe to be better than others. But further, this does not mean that these moral and social laws have to be related to any particular nation, region or philosophy.
Clearly your brain is not trained to accept such subtleties.

is your country where you live, promoting and preserving something too? have your country a queen?

Is English your second language? Yes, there is a queen where I live.

or what you mean about relativism, in this sentence?: ""My country" as you call it does not have a definitive 'way of life' that needs preserving against some assumed attack by relativism." and in this context?: "How does it feel seeing your country and way of life being washed away by the relativist absurdist views of your nations?"? did you answered to that sentence like that or not? why i feel like an criminal investigator with you? start speaking! its lot easier that way.

Some questions are bullshit because they are based on false assumption. Try to answer this one; " When did you stop beating your wife?"
Go on! Answer it! Don't avoid it!
Try this; "Do you still kill baby kittens?" Yes or No!!

Mark Question · **Joined:** Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:20 am **Posts:** 513

chaz wyman wrote:

Being a relativist is not a exhaustive appellation. I might be one on some issues and not on others.

"How does it feel seeing your country and way of life being washed away by the relativist absurdist views of your nations?"
Some questions are bullshit because they are based on false assumption. Try to answer this one; " When did you stop beating your wife?"
Go on! Answer it! Don't avoid it!

so, you might be relativist "on some issues and not on others"?
so, lots of people might be relativist "on some issues and not on others"?
and different people could be relativists on different issues and not on different issues?
could some of them see relativist absurdist views of your nation there where you cant see any relativist absurdist views of your nation?
could some of them see those views as a threat to your country, even if you dont see the same?
would some of those wonder why did you answer to them: "When did you stop beating your wife?" if you would do so?

chaz wyman · **Joined:** Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm **Posts:** 10592

Mark Question wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

Being a relativist is not a exhaustive appellation. I might be one on some issues and not on others.

"How does it feel seeing your country and way of life being washed away by the relativist absurdist views of your nations?"
Some questions are bullshit because they are based on false assumption. Try to answer this one; " When did you stop beating your wife?"
Go on! Answer it! Don't avoid it!

so, you might be relativist "on some issues and not on others"?

That is what I said. But do you understand it?

so, lots of people might be relativist "on some issues and not on others"?

I think most people recognise that other people have differing views.

and different people could be relativists on different issues and not on different issues?

This is gibberish.

could some of them see relativist absurdist views of your nation there where you cant see any relativist absurdist views of your nation?

No one on this thread will know what you mean by 'relativist absurdist' views until you actually say what you think this phrase means.
Your problem is that you are an essentialist. There is no views "of a nation". Nations do not have views. They are not conscious entities like a person.
This is where you are going wrong in your life. I imagine you have taken on board the view of what you think is the views of your nation and are upset to see them change and be different to what you expected.
Take a look at this article.
http://bigthink.com/ideas/39550

could some of them see those views as a threat to your country, even if you dont see the same?

Only people like you who lack imagination.

would some of those wonder why did you answer to them: "When did you stop beating your wife?" if you would do so?

You didn't get the purpose of that device did you? Never mind!

You are gibbering.
Do you have anything to add to this thread or not?

Mark Question · **Joined:** Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:20 am **Posts:** 513

chaz wyman wrote:

Some questions are bullshit because they are based on false assumption.

Quote:

so, you might be relativist "on some issues and not on others"?

That is what I said. But do you understand it?

maybe theres no bullshit questions if some relativists, on some issues, think that all assumptions are equally valid? do you understand? or what kind of relativist you think you are?

Quote:

so, lots of people might be relativist "on some issues and not on others"?

I think most people recognise that other people have differing views.

is breivik really a relativist, if he see that europeans have differing views? was that the reason why he attacked so brutally against bullshitters(like he see them)?

Quote:

and different people could be relativists on different issues and not on different issues?

This is gibberish.

sorry my bad english. its hard to teach old dog to speak some modern latin.

Quote:

No one on this thread will know what you mean by 'relativist absurdist' views until you actually say what you think this phrase means.

actually, thats not my sentence at all. and you have answered to it before. remember?:

chaz wyman wrote:

Wootah wrote:

How does it feel seeing your country and way of life being washed away by the relativist absurdist views of your nations?

If this really is your question then I suggest you revise it as its premise is false.

breivik seemed to see the situation quite a clear when he shot those childrens because of false thinking, without hesitation? and you seem to see the situation quite a clear too, or not? is it clear to you what is false and what is not? or are you just having a big pile of clear assumptions?:

Quote:

Your problem is that you are an essentialist. There is no views "of a nation". Nations do not have views. They are not conscious entities like a person.
This is where you are going wrong in your life. I imagine you have taken on board the view of what you think is the views of your nation and are upset to see them change and be different to what you expected.
Take a look at this article.
http://bigthink.com/ideas/39550

are you talking to breivik or wootah? or the straw man?

could someone see also cultural changes as a threat, and see it like absurd situation, from his point of views? is your point of view more or absolutely right than breiviks or wootahs?

chaz wyman · **Joined:** Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm **Posts:** 10592

Mark Question wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

Some questions are bullshit because they are based on false assumption.

Quote:

so, you might be relativist "on some issues and not on others"?

That is what I said. But do you understand it?

maybe theres no bullshit questions if some relativists, on some issues, think that all assumptions are equally valid? do you understand? or what kind of relativist you think you are?

Quote:

so, lots of people might be relativist "on some issues and not on others"?

I think most people recognise that other people have differing views.

is breivik really a relativist, if he see that europeans have differing views? was that the reason why he attacked so brutally against bullshitters(like he see them)?

Quote:

and different people could be relativists on different issues and not on different issues?

This is gibberish.

sorry my bad english. its hard to teach old dog to speak some modern latin.

Quote:

No one on this thread will know what you mean by 'relativist absurdist' views until you actually say what you think this phrase means.

actually, thats not my sentence at all. and you have answered to it before. remember?:

chaz wyman wrote:

Wootah wrote:

How does it feel seeing your country and way of life being washed away by the relativist absurdist views of your nations?

If this really is your question then I suggest you revise it as its premise is false.

breivik seemed to see the situation quite a clear when he shot those childrens because of false thinking, without hesitation? and you seem to see the situation quite a clear too, or not? is it clear to you what is false and what is not? or are you just having a big pile of clear assumptions?:

See, this is where you are talking bullshit. What do you mean by false thinking? If you take this line of argument then you will never understand what is going on. You are just like to idiots who think you can explain WW2 by called Hitler and evil moron. The difficulties come when you try to figure out actually what is going on inside the minds of people like Breivik and Hitler. Until you do you will not be able to find solutions to them.
One thing is for sure, the way Hitler and Breivik think fulfils their own person logic and is far from 'false' in any meaningful sense. You and I might not agree with what they think. But rejecting it as false, stupid, evil or moronic is not way to understand what just happened. This is the value of relativism. Relativism does not make you their bitch. It does not stop you having a choice, but it DOES enable you to figure stuff out.
You have no understanding of them. I do. Which is the wisest course?

Quote:

Your problem is that you are an essentialist. There is no views "of a nation". Nations do not have views. They are not conscious entities like a person.
This is where you are going wrong in your life. I imagine you have taken on board the view of what you think is the views of your nation and are upset to see them change and be different to what you expected.
Take a look at this article.
http://bigthink.com/ideas/39550

are you talking to breivik or wootah? or the straw man?

I seems I am talking to a person with wool in his ears.

could someone see also cultural changes as a threat, and see it like absurd situation, from his point of views? is your point of view more or absolutely right than breiviks or wootahs?

All culture is change. Get over it!

Wootah · **Joined:** Tue Apr 07, 2009 6:43 am **Posts:** 2451

Maybe this is what the rioters are training for in the UK?

Attack the Block
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cD0gm7dHKKc

Wootah · **Joined:** Tue Apr 07, 2009 6:43 am **Posts:** 2451

Rule of law, we don't need no stinking rule of law.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -home.html

Arising_uk · **Joined:** Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am **Posts:** 10396

The Daily fucking Mail! :roll:

Mark Question · **Joined:** Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:20 am **Posts:** 513

chaz wyman wrote:

See, this is where you are talking bullshit. What do you mean by false thinking? If you take this line of argument then you will never understand what is going on. You are just like to idiots who think you can explain WW2 by called Hitler and evil moron. The difficulties come when you try to figure out actually what is going on inside the minds of people like Breivik and Hitler. Until you do you will not be able to find solutions to them.
One thing is for sure, the way Hitler and Breivik think fulfils their own person logic and is far from 'false' in any meaningful sense. You and I might not agree with what they think. But rejecting it as false, stupid, evil or moronic is not way to understand what just happened. This is the value of relativism. Relativism does not make you their bitch. It does not stop you having a choice, but it DOES enable you to figure stuff out.
You have no understanding of them. I do. Which is the wisest course?

if "its premise is false" then can we say that its thinking is false. why else its premise would be false, if not the thinking is false? so, are you talking to yourself, this time? talk to me sometime. not wootah or breivik, mr. straw man or you. ok? please?

Quote:

Your problem is that you are an essentialist. There is no views "of a nation". Nations do not have views. They are not conscious entities like a person.
This is where you are going wrong in your life. I imagine you have taken on board the view of what you think is the views of your nation and are upset to see them change and be different to what you expected.
Take a look at this article.
http://bigthink.com/ideas/39550

are you talking to breivik or wootah? or the straw man?

I seems I am talking to a person with wool in his ears.

if i ask what you think about wootahs sentence, why i should answer to your critisism to wootahs person and life? and how did you know that i had wool in my ears!? mom?

Quote:

could someone see also cultural changes as a threat, and see it like absurd situation, from his point of views? is your point of view more or absolutely right than breiviks or wootahs?

All culture is change. Get over it!

was that your answer? really? i didnt ask about what i see as a threat. i was pointing to that wootahs sentence and its views. do you remember, what we have been talking and criticising here, in this subject and in these posts and in your last post, today? try to remember. and thank you for partisipating.

chaz wyman · **Joined:** Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm **Posts:** 10592

Mark Question wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

See, this is where you are talking bullshit. What do you mean by false thinking? If you take this line of argument then you will never understand what is going on. You are just like to idiots who think you can explain WW2 by called Hitler and evil moron. The difficulties come when you try to figure out actually what is going on inside the minds of people like Breivik and Hitler. Until you do you will not be able to find solutions to them.
One thing is for sure, the way Hitler and Breivik think fulfils their own person logic and is far from 'false' in any meaningful sense. You and I might not agree with what they think. But rejecting it as false, stupid, evil or moronic is not way to understand what just happened. This is the value of relativism. Relativism does not make you their bitch. It does not stop you having a choice, but it DOES enable you to figure stuff out.
You have no understanding of them. I do. Which is the wisest course?

if "its premise is false" then can we say that its thinking is false. why else its premise would be false, if not the thinking is false? so, are you talking to yourself, this time? talk to me sometime. not wootah or breivik, mr. straw man or you. ok? please?

You premise is indeed false - congratulations for agreeing with me!

Now tell me what you think is Breivik's premises that you have declared false?

Quote:

Your problem is that you are an essentialist. There is no views "of a nation". Nations do not have views. They are not conscious entities like a person.
This is where you are going wrong in your life. I imagine you have taken on board the view of what you think is the views of your nation and are upset to see them change and be different to what you expected.
Take a look at this article.
http://bigthink.com/ideas/39550

are you talking to breivik or wootah? or the straw man?

I seems I am talking to a person with wool in his ears.

if i ask what you think about wootahs sentence, why i should answer to your critisism to wootahs person and life? and how did you know that i had wool in my ears!? mom?

Quote:

could someone see also cultural changes as a threat, and see it like absurd situation, from his point of views? is your point of view more or absolutely right than breiviks or wootahs?

All culture is change. Get over it!

was that your answer? really? i didnt ask about what i see as a threat. i was pointing to that wootahs sentence and its views. do you remember, what we have been talking and criticising here, in this subject and in these posts and in your last post, today? try to remember. and thank you for partisipating.

We would get more progress in our exchange if you stopped hiding behind Wootah.

[/quote]

Mark Question · **Joined:** Sun Jul 04, 2010 5:20 am **Posts:** 513

chaz wyman wrote:

You premise is indeed false - congratulations for agreeing with me!
Now tell me what you think is Breivik's premises that you have declared false?

dont get me wrong. your words: "its premise is false" and "What do you mean by false thinking?", am i right? i was wondering your logic with those. and you can answer to yourself about false declared premises done by only you?

Quote:

We would get more progress in our exchange if you stopped hiding behind Wootah.

so, you are not answering the questions? ok. and what if i ask you something what plato or marx have said about something? do i hide behind plato or marx then? philosophy for scary people? boo!

chaz wyman · **Joined:** Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm **Posts:** 10592

Mark Question wrote:

chaz wyman wrote:

You premise is indeed false - congratulations for agreeing with me!
Now tell me what you think is Breivik's premises that you have declared false?

dont get me wrong. your words: "its premise is false" and "What do you mean by false thinking?", am i right? i was wondering your logic with those. and you can answer to yourself about false declared premises done by only you?

Is English a second language? If so forgive my comment: but you can hardly expect me to respond to that mangled grammar.

Quote:

We would get more progress in our exchange if you stopped hiding behind Wootah.

so, you are not answering the questions? ok. and what if i ask you something what plato or marx have said about something? do i hide behind plato or marx then? philosophy for scary people? boo!

Where have I even so much as mentioned Marx or Plato?

My contention is that you are wrong to say that Breivik is guilty of 'false thinking'.
Defend your statement with grammatically understandable statements or take a walk.

Philosophy Now Forum

Anders Breivik and Europe

Who is online