Post # 127. Damn, jackson_dem, did you even read my post to you about how marginalizing name calling is?
There you SAW the game,you called it right on the head..laid it bare for..All to see. But did they HEAR?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4584614This is a variation of flamebait, and prior to internet, was used by flimflam artists, or grifters.
Picked up by college republicans, in a long tradition of Segretti, Atwater, Rove, Norquist.
They play on human nature's dark side. Class resentment is as subconscious and predictable as any other form of sublimated hate.Race, sex, gender, greed, age, class, and so on.
Think dollar bill on the street.
think getting bumped into and distracted, then your wallet gets nabbed...Think Volleyball. One hit, then setup, then slam.
As stated in an earlier post, there are two examples of just this particular thing in the last couple of hours.
there was another with the same story and reaction set a few days ago. I was one of the "outragees" - since I am very class sensitive, I fell for it myself! SUCKER!
We are being played people. By whom? I would have to have IP addresses to get more info, but we are being played.
Outrage fanning is a common trick.
"You and him fight" -and who is standing by watching, or encouraging?
*(and that is why every bully has a posse of willing"agents" to do his bidding.) For if a bully had to do it alone he surely would be caught and his game stopped.)*
Pull back from an advocacy position, and look at this board like a psyops expert, then a criminal investigator of fraud.
*(Having emotional detachment is VITAL in situations of abuse if you are to see the patterns laid out by bullies and attack the right target(s)!!)*
Great analysis!!Bongo Prophet!! Let's hope the engineered outraged notice they've been had.
You said "
I guess empathy cannot be taught. Nor can manners."
http://philosophy.lander.edu/ethics/ethics.papers.s00/paper4.htmlAnd even plato knew this to be true. That virtue cannot be taught. It is innate.
http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/plato.htmlThe actual text of Meno
http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/meno.html"Note the patterns of outrage, and the ebb and flow of it.
Like music.Like someone's playing our prejudices and class assumptions like a fucking fiddle."
Exactly when more people stop trying to dominate and more people get aware, than maybe the fiddle playing will stop.
Conscience, remember, is the interior witness to principles which are the same for all. But if they are the same for all, then how can mine clash with yours? You understand the dilemma? According to one story, there can be a clash but it is not conscientious; according to the other, there is a conscience but its convictions cannot clash.
This is a very old riddle, and it was both posed and solved, if you will believe me, in the later middle ages. We are all accustomed to distinguishing between the conscious and subconscious mind. Well, the Scholastic philosophers did not put it that way, but they made a similar distinction. They had two words for conscience, not just one, reflecting a real difference between two aspects of the mind. For conscience in the sense in which we have been speaking, they used a late Greek word, synderesis. Besides synderesis, though, there is conscience in another sense, which they called conscientia. Forgive me, but you must remember these definitions. Synderesis is the interior witness to universal basic moral law, the deep structure of moral reasoning, and it cannot err. Conscientia is the surface structure of moral reasoning, the working out of applications and conclusions from the universal basic moral law, and it can err. In fact it can err in at least four different ways: through insufficient experience; through insufficient skill in reasoning; through inattention; or through the perversion of reasoning - - a broad category including perversion by passion, by corrupt habit, by corrupt custom, by congenitally impaired disposition, by depraved ideology, and by self-deception - - the latter corresponding to the case where we pretend to ourselves that we don't know what we really do know, either about the facts, or about the rule itself.
The obvious solution to the third cause of erroneous conscientia, inattention, is attention. The wisest ethical teachers and thinkers have not built elaborate deductive systems from flights of fancy like a presocial state of nature. Rather, they have appealed to everyday knowledge we already have but do not notice.
Read more...
http://www.consciencelaws.org/Examining-Conscience-Ethical/Ethical07.html
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
