___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

quote:

Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 So anyway, I was just talking to this stupid girl about a buffalo skin I bought. And she started blabbing that I am a murderer of animals and that stuff. So I asked her if she eats meat, to what she replied positively. However, she still thinks she is a good person and I am a murderer of animals.

This is my main problem with the so-called politicised kids at uni (and most extremists). More often than not, their intention is good, but their rhetoric is deeply flawed because they're speaking out of passion, rather than using any reason (at all).

This is the main problem when something is discussed with opinions and emotions rather than with facts and reason. Sure, having opinions and being passionate about something may be a start, but it might be blinding in most scenarios: as the leftist militant who wants to equally distribute wealth and would most likely make everyone poor; the vegetarian who's against animal killing, but can't realise vegetables are living beings too (and that we need to kill in order to live); the extremist polygamous (or monogamous) who wants everyone else to think their way and neglects other realities and so on.

That's a common form of ignorance, which can be easily explained by Shaolin Z's sig (the Benjamin Franklin's Stephen Hawking's quote about illusion of knowledge being worse than ignorance).

I don't see myself as a ultimate source of knowledge either: I wish the Brazilian government would allow me not to vote, for example, since I don't have the necessary knowledge to choose the leader of the nation I live in (that's a way too great responsibility to be handed over to people with "opinions").

___________________

quote:

Originally said by Adolf Fleisch Hitler How naive can people be? Curing the COR with messy hair and philosophy?

quote:

Originally said by Maurice Moss I came here to kick ass and drink milk... and I've just finished my milk

Good job Croatia got knocked out early cos I just picked up their football shirt for half price!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Lira I wish the Brazilian government would allow me not to vote, for example, since I don't have the necessary knowledge to choose the leader of the nation I live in (that's a way too great responsibility to be handed over to people with "opinions").

i'd support such utopian notions (driven to extreme of not allowing people-who-lack-relevant-knowledge to vote)... seems like justified eliticism - though i wonder how many voters that would leave each nation with

___________________
People who own my ass: Citric Acid, Boomer187, Tribu, Sand Leaper,
Jackson, venomX, jamie, Renegade, Konjin, Akridrot, Miss Bliss.
Psy-T - Down The Rabbit Hole (400minute long acid set)

quote:

Originally posted by Psy-T i'd support such utopian notions (driven to extreme of not allowing people-who-lack-relevant-knowledge to vote)... seems like justified eliticism - though i wonder how many voters that would leave each nation with

There are 3 solutions I've thought for this Brazilian problem:

1. Optional voting: I sure don't know Lula and the other candidates from my daily life - how the hell can I be forced into voting for someone I've never met, even if I don't care about politics? Let those who want to vote do what they want.
   
   That's the most realistic option, in my opinion, and that's what happens where voting isn't mandatory.
   
   
2. Indirect Democracy: Although I don't know Lula, I do know a bit more about those who live in my city/neighbourhood. They're closer to my reality, and know it well. Why can't the mayors vote for the governors, who would eventually pick the president?
   
   That would still be a democratic government, would it? I'm not in my mayor's shoes, so I can't know what governor would help him do his job best (even if they're from the same party).
   
   
3. Multiple governments: I'm tired of seeing deputies doing nothing, creating laws about things they don't know anything about (e.g. grammar). Why can't we have economists taking care (on their own) of economy, sociologists taking care of society, and linguists taking care of the language?
   
   This would be way too utopian though, and I doubt it would work in real life.
   

___________________

quote:

Originally said by Adolf Fleisch Hitler How naive can people be? Curing the COR with messy hair and philosophy?

quote:

Originally said by Maurice Moss I came here to kick ass and drink milk... and I've just finished my milk

I watched the soccer in teh city last night and was fucking devestated

I have no respect for theatrical diving queens, fucking discgraceful!

I Stole this from teh world cup forum, hilarious to see how the US media paints soccer, if the USA had gotten further in the tournament they would all be praising teh sport...

quote:

U.S. Isn’t Exactly World Cup-Crazy Weekly Standard: Soccer Is Just Ninety Minutes Of Nothing In its recent World Cup contest with Italy, the U.S. team played what was widely regarded by the sport's connoisseurs as one of the best games ever played by an American soccer squad on foreign soil. The historic game with Italy ended in an epic 1-1 tie. But in what was ballyhooed as one of the greatest games ever played by an American team, the United States failed to score. The goal credited to the Americans was scored by an opposing player who — oops! — accidentally kicked the ball into his own goal. Think about this about this for a moment. It just about sums up everything you need to know about soccer, or football, as it is known elsewhere. Soccer is the perfect game for the post-modern world. It's the quintessential expression of the nihilism that prevails in many cultures, which doubtlessly accounts for its wild popularity in Europe. Soccer is truly Seinfeldesque, a game about nothing, sport as sensation. Most soccer matches end in scoreless ties (or nil, nil in soccer parlance), 1-1 deadlocks or 1-0 victories. A final score of 2-1 is regarded as a veritable outburst of offense, an avalanche of goal scoring that leaves exhausted fans shaking their heads and pining for the old days when teams knew how to play strong defense. A score of 2-0 is said to be a crushing victory (or defeat) of Carthaginian proportions rendering national shame and humiliation and potentially resulting in coup d'etat, or even war. In truth, soccer could be played without using a ball at all, and few would notice the difference. The game consists of 22 men running up and down a grassy field for 90 minutes with little happening as fans scream wildly. When the ball actually approaches one of the goals, the fans reach fever pitch and the cheering becomes a deafening roar. Of course, these infrequent occurrences in which the soccer ball approaches the end zone — where goaltenders wile away their time perusing magazines, trimming their fingernails or inspecting blades of grass — rarely result in a shot on goal. Most often the ball ends up high over the goal, missing everything by 20 or 30 feet. These "near misses" typically send the fans into paroxysms; TV announcers scream themselves hoarse. Then the players mill about the field for another 20 or 30 minutes or so and the goaltenders return to their musings before the ball returns, like Halley's comet in its far-flung orbit, for another pass in the general vicinity of the goal. Mostly soccer is just guys in shorts running around aimlessly, a metaphor for the meaninglessness of life. Whole blocks of game time transpire during which absolutely nothing happens. Fortunately, this permits fans to slip out for a bratwurst and a beer without missing anything important. It's little wonder fans at times resort to brawling amongst themselves in the grandstands, as there is so little transpiring on the field of play to occupy their wandering attention. Watching men in shorts scampering around has its limitations. It's like gazing too long at a painting by de Kooning or Jackson Pollock. The more you look, the less there is to see. Despite heroic efforts of soccer moms, suburban liberals, and World Cup hype, soccer will never catch on as a big time sport in America. No game in which actually scoring goals is of such little importance could possibly occupy the attention of average Americans. Our country has yet to succumb to the nihilism, existentialism, and anomie that have overtaken Europe. A game about nothing, in which scoring is purely incidental, holds scant interest for Americans who still believe the world makes sense, that life has a larger meaning and structure, that being is not an end in itself, being qua being. Another reason why soccer will never enthrall Americans is that the game is contrary to nature. What is it that is unique to the physical makeup of human beings that sets us apart from the animal world? Two things: Our large brains and our grasping hands with opposable thumbs. Our big brain is why we're called homo sapiens, thinking man. And our ability to use our hands to grasp and manipulate objects is why one of our early ancestors was designated homo habilis, handy man. Human beings are thinking toolmakers. We're able to imagine the arrowhead in the stone and use our hands to carve it out of the rock. These two uniquely human traits have allowed us to become the dominant species on the planet. Yet soccer flies in the face of nature. In almost all other sports, the head is protected against injury. Players wear helmets and try to avoid contact with sticks, bats, balls, elbows, fists, roadways, goalposts and other things that might inflict injury on that big brain that gives humans the ability to plan ahead, calculate, strategize, coordinate eye and hand movements, anticipate the consequence of actions — in other words, to play the game. But soccer players use their heads, deliberately, to contact the ball. This is contrary to all human instinct, which is to keep the head out of the way of danger. Duck, you idiot! Protecting the head against injury is deeply rooted in our nature. It's an evolutionary survival response. Sacrifice a limb if you must, give up an arm or leg, but protect your head at all costs. Yet in soccer the player is encouraged, no, expected to hit the ball with his head. This is as stupid an action as a human being can undertake. Secondly, any game which prohibits the use of the hands is contrary to nature. Opposable thumbs allow humans to grasp things (thumbs on other primate hands such as chimps and orangutans are splayed out the side and are not truly opposable.) This is why the games human beings play involve holding things such as baseball bats, golf clubs and hockey sticks, or to grip and throw objects like a ball or a Frisbee. Soccer denies its players this most basic human ability. Players cannot catch or throw the ball. But they can hit it with their heads. If one were to set out to invent a game fundamentally at odds with human nature, soccer would be it. Place the head with its big brain in constant danger, and prohibit the use of the hands. Soccer denies to its players the very attributes that make human beings, the thinking toolmaker, human. Actually, the donkey would have a significant advantage over humans in soccer. It has four legs rather than two. The donkey has no hands or opposable thumbs, nor any need of them in order to play soccer. And smashing its head into a soccer ball probably would not cause any diminution of equine IQ. Soccer, then, would appear to be a game better suited to dim-witted quadrupeds than to human beings. By Frank Cannon and Richard Lessner

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006...in1746998.shtml

i think i speak for all football fans when i say

fuck you america.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by tathi I Stole this from teh world cup forum, hilarious to see how the US media paints soccer, if the USA had gotten further in the tournament they would all be praising teh sport... http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006...in1746998.shtml

Relax. It's a copy from cbs of something written for the weekly standard. It's almost like getting exciting over something Ann Coulter said ... almost.

___________________
Retro ...

bloody extreemists :P

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Relax. It's a copy from cbs of something written for the weekly standard. It's almost like getting exciting over something Ann Coulter said ... almost.

but we're aussies. hating americans is like a national sport

___________________