lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: It's Nobel Stupdity Week. (aka comparing tragedies)
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 10-22-2007, 09:24 PM   #1
SilentScope001
May The Force Serve You.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,236
It's Nobel Stupdity Week. (aka comparing tragedies)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071022/.../spain_lessing

Well, at least Dawkin was a Scientist, so he was okay for saying his comment. And Lessing can get more people to agree with her viewpoints. I might agree with her if I wasn't so sympathetic to the IRA.

Still doesn't mean her comments was a bit...shall we say...strange...


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Onion
"The Cambodian government has established many exciting-sounding 're-education camps' where both intellectuals and everyday citizens can be sent at any time," Day said. Well, we at Barnes & Noble have always supported re-education in America, and we intend to extend this policy to our new customers." For every hardcover book sold, Barnes & Noble will donate a dollar to the Cambodian government to help re-educate local children.
Full Article Here
SilentScope001 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-22-2007, 09:35 PM   #2
Totenkopf
English spoken in What
 
Totenkopf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: What?
Posts: 4,778
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member Forum Veteran 
Strange, perhaps, but not unexpected. Actually, I'd think it rather strange had she had a diametrically opposed pov and still won. Given that the IRA attack didn't take out Parliament or the Prime Minister, I fail to see how she sees it as more significant than what happened in NY and Washington.


Now, I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor, dumb bastard die for his country.---Patton

There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism.---Teddy Roosevelt

I never forget a face, but in your case I'll make an exception.---Groucho

And if you all get killed, I'll piss on your graves.---Shaman Urdnot

How would you like to own a little bit of my foot in your ass.---Red Foreman
Totenkopf is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-23-2007, 12:10 AM   #3
Web Rider
Senior Member
 
Web Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: here
Posts: 1,768
Yeah, because a whole war is comparable to a single event.

That's like saying all of WWII was worse than some other given bad attack.

OF COURSE IT IS. Because one was a prolonged struggle and the other was a singular attack. Jeeze, some people have no sense of context.


"So if you go to Washington, it's buildings clean and nice. Bring a pack of matches...and we'll burn the White House twice!"

"Nobody's talking about extermination. No one ever does. They just do it." - Magneto

"Don't solicit for your sister, that's not nice, unless you get a good percentage of her price."
Web Rider is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-23-2007, 05:54 AM   #4
Pavlos
Scruffy Englishman
 
Pavlos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The real world/ivory towers
Posts: 1,974
Current Game: Viking Warrior Poets
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Strange, perhaps, but not unexpected. Actually, I'd think it rather strange had she had a diametrically opposed pov and still won. Given that the IRA attack didn't take out Parliament or the Prime Minister, I fail to see how she sees it as more significant than what happened in NY and Washington.
Between 1969 and 2001, 3,523 people were killed as a result of the Troubles. About ten times that number were injured in the conflict. I'm inclined to agree with her. The Troubles were true terrorism - they scared people in a war of attrition. There was a time when you couldn't turn on the television without seeing some new piece of news about the situation. I also don't see your point, the President of the USA wasn't killed, nor was Capitol Hill at all affected by the 11/9 attacks.

September 11th was bad, she doesn't deny that and I don't deny that, but, if you ask me, the Troubles and the terrorism of the IRA was worse (we don't even have bins in London, out of fear that there'll be a bomb in one!)

It's rather like asking: Which is worse, to die, or to have a limb ripped off, then another, and another, and another... and then leaving you to bleed to death? I think I'd go with the latter.

Luckily, recent progress has put an end to the Troubles and with any luck we won't see any more deaths (on both sides Republican and Unionist).


StarWarsKnights.com -- News and features will be returning shortly...

I 'gin to be a-weary of the sun,
And wish the estate o' the world were now undone.
Pavlos is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-23-2007, 08:32 PM   #5
Totenkopf
English spoken in What
 
Totenkopf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: What?
Posts: 4,778
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member Forum Veteran 
Part of the problem is that "9-11" wasn't an isolated event. Just as IRA terrorism was an ongoing problem, islamic terrorism against the US didn't happen just that once. You also have to remember the various embassies, Khobar Towers, the USS Cole and even the first attack on the trade center. Also, where there may now be an end to the IRA attacks, islamic terrorism vs the US is still in the early phases. And, the ramifications of the attacks on the US didn't have repercussions restricted to primarily two countries. I think her sense of context is somewhat myopic, all the more so if it becomes a pissing contest about the numbers of dead or wounded as being the deciding factor about which is "worse". Let us revisit the issue in 2031 and then compare notes, maybe she'll prove right (though I highly doubt it).

Quote:
"Do you know what people forget? That the IRA attacked with bombs against our government; it killed several people while a Conservative congress was being held and in which the prime minister, Margaret Thatcher, was (attending). People forget," she said.
Actually, this is what I was referencing. She takes an isolated event and tries to blow its signifigance somewhat out of context. While Bush et al weren't killed, the Pentagon was hit and flight 93 was believed headed for the WH (or perhaps Congress). Seems more people died in those incidences than the direct attack on a government related function she cites, w/neither side (US and GB) losing it's leader. Perhaps if she were comparing 30+ years of IRA terrorism against the OK bombing in '93, I might see her point.


Now, I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor, dumb bastard die for his country.---Patton

There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism.---Teddy Roosevelt

I never forget a face, but in your case I'll make an exception.---Groucho

And if you all get killed, I'll piss on your graves.---Shaman Urdnot

How would you like to own a little bit of my foot in your ass.---Red Foreman
Totenkopf is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-23-2007, 11:06 PM   #6
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Web Rider
Yeah, because a whole war is comparable to a single event.
Why should it matter if people are killed over the course of several years compared to a day? Suppose the the 3000 people killed in 9/11 were killed over the course of a week. Can you honestly say that the extra 6 days it takes for those 3000 people to be killed will significantly change the impact their deaths will have on the world?



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 01:17 AM   #7
Web Rider
Senior Member
 
Web Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: here
Posts: 1,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
Why should it matter if people are killed over the course of several years compared to a day? Suppose the the 3000 people killed in 9/11 were killed over the course of a week. Can you honestly say that the extra 6 days it takes for those 3000 people to be killed will significantly change the impact their deaths will have on the world?
Stop....Hammer time...

Did you seriously just ask that? I said you can't compare a war to a single attack.

You compared a week of death to a single act.

The IRA-Britain war lasted 30 years! Generations were born and raised during this war. Yes, YES the time makes a difference, because the prolonged state of terror, fear and warfare generates a mindset in the people. A single attack can have lasting effects, but if that attack is stretched out over 30 years, the power and effect of that attack is stretched as well! I can't believe you'd even ask for somebody to explain why a war and a single attack have entirely different effects on a populous.

Maybe you simply don't know about the IRA stuff. Lets try a bigger war.

World War II. WWII lasted roughly 10 years, from the 1930s till the 1940s. But was for many an extension of WWI, and much of the ideologies lasted until the 1980's just before the fall of the USSR. You can read any history book to know the kind of mindset that those wars generated in the people around the world. And you can read those same sources and find all the lasting effects those ideologies had on the people, on the world, on warfare, and everything in between.

The attack at Pearl Harbor generated a reaction. Just like the attack on the WTC did. But the WAR generated a mindset which has huge implications and far reaching effects on the people and countries involved, and even on people and countries NOT involved. Germany still lives under the shadow of Hitler's actions, it's illegial to even joke about being a Nazi. They barely even teach WWII in schools they're so embarrassed over it.

Now, do I need to reiterate that a war and a singular attack are not comparable events?


"So if you go to Washington, it's buildings clean and nice. Bring a pack of matches...and we'll burn the White House twice!"

"Nobody's talking about extermination. No one ever does. They just do it." - Magneto

"Don't solicit for your sister, that's not nice, unless you get a good percentage of her price."
Web Rider is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 06:05 AM   #8
Totenkopf
English spoken in What
 
Totenkopf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: What?
Posts: 4,778
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member Forum Veteran 
Actually, Web, it was Lessing that initially offended your sense of proportionality by attempting to dismiss the trade center attacks as insignificant COMPARED to the violence perpetrated by the IRA against GB. Perhaps you should direct your ire toward her.


Now, I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor, dumb bastard die for his country.---Patton

There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism.---Teddy Roosevelt

I never forget a face, but in your case I'll make an exception.---Groucho

And if you all get killed, I'll piss on your graves.---Shaman Urdnot

How would you like to own a little bit of my foot in your ass.---Red Foreman
Totenkopf is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 12:26 PM   #9
Web Rider
Senior Member
 
Web Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: here
Posts: 1,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Actually, Web, it was Lessing that initially offended your sense of proportionality by attempting to dismiss the trade center attacks as insignificant COMPARED to the violence perpetrated by the IRA against GB. Perhaps you should direct your ire toward her.
I would, except I'd probly get somebody on my ass for being mean to and old lady.


"So if you go to Washington, it's buildings clean and nice. Bring a pack of matches...and we'll burn the White House twice!"

"Nobody's talking about extermination. No one ever does. They just do it." - Magneto

"Don't solicit for your sister, that's not nice, unless you get a good percentage of her price."
Web Rider is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 12:47 PM   #10
El Sitherino
The Original.
 
El Sitherino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Planet Funkālnite.
Posts: 14,509
Hot Topic Starter LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran LF Jester 
I personally see this as emotional bullplop.

People die, people kill. I conclude people suck.

1,000s of years of human stupidity > 30 years IRA attacks > 10 years attacks on US targets by "Islamic" terrorists.

We're all in the same boat.
The end.


“This body is not me. I am not caught in this body.
I am life without limit.”
El Sitherino is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 01:33 PM   #11
mimartin
TOR ate my KotOR
 
mimartin's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,025
Current Game: TOR/FO:NV
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Officer The Walking Carpets Guild Officer Alderaan News Holopics contributor 
I have no problem with what Doris Lessing said. I’m sure from her perspective the IRA attacks in Britain were worst. If she had friends and loved ones in the Twin Towers I sure her perspective would be different. I fail to see what difference saying one was worst than another makes. It makes it no less tragic to any of the family members that loss someone or to those that survived but are maimed for life.

To me it is all a matter of perspective and what affects you will always be what you consider the worst.

Personally I don’t know which is worst, September 11, the IRA attacks in England, the estimated 75,000 to 82,369 civilian deaths in Iraq, Virginia Tech, Columbine, Katrina or 2004 Tsunamis... They were all tragic and people died, so I fail to see why one would be more tragic than another just because of time or the numbers killed. Of course I feel more toward the ones in America, but that is only because I am an American. That does not make it a fact, just my perspective.
mimartin is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 04:51 PM   #12
True_Avery
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,002
Nicely said, mimartin.
True_Avery is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 05:59 PM   #13
tk102
Well past expiration date
 
tk102's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,765
Current Game: Assassin's Creed 4
Forum Veteran Helpful! Notable contributor 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimartin
Personally I don’t know which is worst...I fail to see why one would be more tragic than another just because of time or the numbers killed.
Let's ask the robot!


Robot says:
Deaths = tragic
More deaths = more tragic
Death/time = intensity of tragedy

Analysis:

September 11, 2001 -- 3000 dead / 2 hours
IRA -- 3700 dead / 30 years
Iraq -- 80000 dead / 4 years
Virgina Tech -- 33 dead / 2 hours
Columbine -- 15 dead / 45 minutes
Katrina -- 1800 dead / 2 days
2004 Tsunamis -- 187,000 dead / 7 hours

Robot's conclusion:


*robot too sad*


tk102 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 06:06 PM   #14
True_Avery
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk102
*robot too sad*
Would the robot be happier if I added:

Darfur, Sudan -- 450,000+ / 6 Years and counting, added 2 million without homes, wandering the desert, and a good 100,000+ woman raped, and lastly 10,000 women currently in sex slave camps?

Death is death, but somehow I doubt the women in America have fear anything close to the women in Darfur, who have their husbands and sons killed in front of them, many times their daughters gang raped in front of them, then either killed, hauled off to camps, or are given a scar that labels tham as being raped so they become social outcasts for the rest of their lives. And this is done by their own government because of their religion, with little help from the outside world to stop it.

Between 9/11 and a genocide, I'd still choose 9/11. At least that only lasted a few hours.

Sometimes dead and how it is done does have a greater effect upon the people around it.

People may talk about deaths and incidents a lot, but you don't hear a lot of people talking about the holocaust in the same light.
True_Avery is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 06:12 PM   #15
tk102
Well past expiration date
 
tk102's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,765
Current Game: Assassin's Creed 4
Forum Veteran Helpful! Notable contributor 
Quote:
Would the robot be happier if I added:
Yeah, I think he was sad because he didn't have any more data to analyze.


tk102 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 06:15 PM   #16
True_Avery
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk102
Yeah, I think he was sad because he didn't have any more data to analyze.
We needs more data to make robot happy!
True_Avery is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 07:27 PM   #17
Web Rider
Senior Member
 
Web Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: here
Posts: 1,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Avery
Always remember children, your suffering doesn't matter if somebody is suffering worse.
Yeah, I don't think so. The fact that a horrible event is taking place in one part of the world does not make another horrible event in another part of the world not matter.


"So if you go to Washington, it's buildings clean and nice. Bring a pack of matches...and we'll burn the White House twice!"

"Nobody's talking about extermination. No one ever does. They just do it." - Magneto

"Don't solicit for your sister, that's not nice, unless you get a good percentage of her price."
Web Rider is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 08:30 PM   #18
mimartin
TOR ate my KotOR
 
mimartin's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,025
Current Game: TOR/FO:NV
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Officer The Walking Carpets Guild Officer Alderaan News Holopics contributor 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tk102
Let's ask the robot!...Robot's conclusion:

*robot too sad*
When I look at the number and time that way I get to sad too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Avery
Between 9/11 and a genocide, I'd still choose 9/11. At least that only lasted a few hours.
I’d choose neither. Darfur, Bosnia, Iraq, September 11, 2001, the IRA, Virginia Tech, Columbine and your local gang shooting are all tragic and all preventable. Humans have been here around 200,000 years and our greatest achievement is our never-ending ability to find better ways to kill each other. Wish we put in the same effort into finding ways communicate and understand each other.

Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Avery
Sometimes dead and how it is done does have a greater effect upon the people around it.
Agreed, but I’d add who is being kill. That is why school shootings have such an effect, young people being murder with their entire life ahead of them has great affect on most of us.

I love the summation in the movie “A Time to Kill” when Matthew McConaughey tells the story of what happened to the young girl Tonya Hailey. He tells the jury to close their eyes and imagine the horrific things these men did to this young African American girl at the end he tells the jury to “imagine she’s white.” Imagine the people being murdered and raped in Darfur being white. I wonder if that would make a difference to the world leaders allowing this to happen.

Last edited by mimartin; 10-26-2007 at 05:20 PM.
mimartin is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 09:12 PM   #19
SilentScope001
May The Force Serve You.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,236
Quote:
September 11, 2001 -- 3000 dead / 2 hours
IRA -- 3700 dead / 30 years
Iraq -- 80000 dead / 4 years
Virgina Tech -- 33 dead / 2 hours
Columbine -- 15 dead / 45 minutes
Katrina -- 1800 dead / 2 days
2004 Tsunamis -- 187,000 dead / 7 hours
Hah. Wikipedia has some other disasters that will make those disasters pale.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._by_death_toll

Shaanxi earthquake (1556)-830,000/~6 hours
Mount Tambora (1815)-92,000/1 Day
European Heat Wave of 2003-35,000/1 Summer?
The Saturia-Manikganj Sadar Tornado [in Bangladesh] (1989)-1,300/1 Day
Bhola cyclone [in Bangladesh] (1970)- 500,000/1 Day
1931 Yellow River (Huang He) flood-1,000,000–3,700,000
Peshtigo Fire, Wisconsin (1871)-1,200-2,500
Iran Blizzard (1972)-4,000

Oh, and this is small footer compared to the big haul:
Smallpox (20th Century)-300,000,000+
Bubonic Plague (1300s-1720s; 540-590, 1850s-1950s): 300,000,000+
Malaria (20th Century)-80,000,000 - 250,000,000
Period of Three Difficult Years (China, 1958-1961): 20,000,000–43,000,000
Chinese Famine of 1907: 24,000,000
Indian Famine (1896-1902): 19,000,000

...Erm. This should be more than enough to make people realize that we need to arrest Mother Nature for war crimes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Onion
"The Cambodian government has established many exciting-sounding 're-education camps' where both intellectuals and everyday citizens can be sent at any time," Day said. Well, we at Barnes & Noble have always supported re-education in America, and we intend to extend this policy to our new customers." For every hardcover book sold, Barnes & Noble will donate a dollar to the Cambodian government to help re-educate local children.
Full Article Here
SilentScope001 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 09:40 PM   #20
True_Avery
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Web Rider
Yeah, I don't think so. The fact that a horrible event is taking place in one part of the world does not make another horrible event in another part of the world not matter.
Ok, thats taking it a little too far and if you are going to quote me do it right instead of putting in what you want to hear. I will report you next time you do it. You have been warned. But you brought up a good enough point that I'll still debate with you for the time being.

Yes, human suffering sucks. But, unfortunately, there are different levels of human suffering. Yes, it is horrible for a mother to have lost her child in 9/11. It will scar you for life and many never, ever get over it. But they still have a chance to move onto the next day and carry that one fear and one loss in their heart. Another mother in another country may have seen her child raped and killed in front of her while her husband lay bleeding in the corner from a bullet to the head, followed by her being pulled off to an internment camp. Both are terrible loses, but I'd still put my money on the second woman suffering more than the first. Both children are loses, and in the mothers eyes equal loses but there are degrees of suffering that follow. One can visit the site of her sons grave, mourn, and then go to the comfort of her home while the other cries in a corner over her child with the thought of possible not making it out alive herself by morning.

Besides, think about it. It may be a loss for them but how big of a loss is it for you? You don't know either of them and it is only when you are thinking about it that you probably really care about both of those children dying. While 9/11 was happening, people were already dying in sudan. Were you thinking about them, or the attacks on the twin towers on September 11th?

A death is a death. You are absolutely right. But some deaths have more effect on an individual society than they do across the world as a whole. They are still dead, and that is still tragic, but there are people that still care about an American dying than an Iraqi.

Another example:
I shoot the president.
I shoot a poor homeless child in an African slum.

Which one do you think the world is going to care about more? will the African child be all over the news or the death of the President? By some morals, they are equal. By the media and modern day society, the president matters more.

There are deaths going on right now and I can honestly say I do not care about them until they are someone of importance. If I think really hard, I realize people die every second of every minute. If I concentrated on every single one of those deaths and mourned equally for all of them... my mind would cave in on itself and I'd be looking for the nearest gun to jam in my mouth.

I don't know about you. You may have the ability to feel for every human that dies every single day. I, personally, could never handle that so I applaud you on your infinitely large heart and wish that more people like you could live day by day.

*Gives you a standing ovation.*

Quote:
Originally Posted by mimartin
I’d choose neither. Darfur, Bosnia, Iraq, September 11, 2001, the IRA, Virginia Tech, Columbine and your local gang shooting are all tragic and all preventable. Humans have been here around 200,000 years and our greatest achievement is our never-ending ability to find better ways to kill each other. Wish we put in the same effort into finding ways communicate and understand each other.
I agree competely. If they could be avoided I would avoid them. But if I had to choose between 450,000 people dead in Sudan and 3,000 dead in New York... I'd still choose 9/11. That is 447,000 less people dead. Because, if all deaths are tragic, than more deaths would be more tragic. Thats just how math works.

Like you said, until we find a more constructive way to solve our problems we will continue to kill eachother. Wishing otherwise will not change that fact.
True_Avery is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 10:00 PM   #21
mimartin
TOR ate my KotOR
 
mimartin's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,025
Current Game: TOR/FO:NV
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Officer The Walking Carpets Guild Officer Alderaan News Holopics contributor 
Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Avery
Because, if all deaths are tragic, than more deaths would be more tragic. Thats just how math works.
I disagree, I’ll go back to my original point it is all about perspective. If it is my mother, father, sister or brother (maybe not brother) killed and/or rapped that would be more tragic to me, then 3,000 or 450,000 people I do not know. That is sad and self-centered, but true. It is always a bigger tragedy if it happens to you.
mimartin is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 10:06 PM   #22
Totenkopf
English spoken in What
 
Totenkopf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: What?
Posts: 4,778
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member Forum Veteran 
Subjectively, I would agree. Objectively, I disagree.


Now, I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor, dumb bastard die for his country.---Patton

There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism.---Teddy Roosevelt

I never forget a face, but in your case I'll make an exception.---Groucho

And if you all get killed, I'll piss on your graves.---Shaman Urdnot

How would you like to own a little bit of my foot in your ass.---Red Foreman
Totenkopf is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 10:11 PM   #23
True_Avery
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimartin
I disagree, I’ll go back to my original point it is all about perspective. If it is my mother, father, sister or brother (maybe not brother) killed and/or rapped that would be more tragic to me, then 3,000 or 450,000 people I do not know. That is sad and self-centered, but true. It is always a bigger tragedy if it happens to you.
I agree, and I tried to make that point as well in my post.
True_Avery is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 10:11 PM   #24
SilentScope001
May The Force Serve You.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,236
Quote:
I disagree, I’ll go back to my original point it is all about perspective. If it is my mother, father, sister or brother (maybe not brother) killed and/or rapped that would be more tragic to me, then 3,000 or 450,000 people I do not know. That is sad and self-centered, but true. It is always a bigger tragedy if it happens to you.
Also depends on your prespective. Just because you aren't directly affected by the deaths doesn't mean the deaths aren't tragic.

Say, 40,000 people died in a civil war, say, in Bobsland. Now, I don't really shed tears over those deaths, but what if Bobsland has lots of oil and because of those deaths, oil prices get jacked up, UN diploamts are making speeches calling for the end to the violence, and a rich Executive who based his entire career on investment in Bobsland only to see his factories have no people (due to most of his employees being dead and all due to the civil war) will be fired for his utter stupidty.

Then you can start seeing the Executive sobbing. Still being self-centered, still being egoistic, but still crying over the tragedy of him losing his job because of 40,000 people dying. You don't need to be connected to someone via biological relations to still feel the effects of their deaths.

Not only that, but I would be sobbing too. The higher oil prices mean I pay more money, meaning that I will be crying over those deaths that caused me to pay more at the pump. Still being self-centered, still being egoistic, but realizing that those deaths are very important in the world, and it is because of those deaths that led to the most tragic thing ever: Me paying $0.05 extra.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Onion
"The Cambodian government has established many exciting-sounding 're-education camps' where both intellectuals and everyday citizens can be sent at any time," Day said. Well, we at Barnes & Noble have always supported re-education in America, and we intend to extend this policy to our new customers." For every hardcover book sold, Barnes & Noble will donate a dollar to the Cambodian government to help re-educate local children.
Full Article Here
SilentScope001 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 10:21 PM   #25
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Web Rider
Now, do I need to reiterate that a war and a singular attack are not comparable events?
Do I need to restate my belief that time is irrelevant factor?



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-24-2007, 10:40 PM   #26
mimartin
TOR ate my KotOR
 
mimartin's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,025
Current Game: TOR/FO:NV
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Officer The Walking Carpets Guild Officer Alderaan News Holopics contributor 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Totenkopf
Subjectively, I would agree. Objectively, I disagree.
I agree with your statement. Doris Lessing stated her subjective opinion the IRA attacks in England were worst and I subjective disagree that September 11 was worst, but objectively there have been a lot more tragic events then either of them.

Good point SilentScope001. I don’t like the fact that financial consideration make an event more or less tragic, but that is the way of things.

I agree with jmac7142, to me time is a irrelevant factor.
mimartin is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-26-2007, 02:10 AM   #27
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimartin
I agree with jmac7142, to me time is a irrelevant factor.

If it's more or less tragic, I don't know, but if time can change the impact on people, yes.

Pavlos explained how the state of paranoia can be. You can look at the Israel/Palestine situation too. It's been an ongoing war and kids have been brought up in the middle of it. They've been born to hate each other. The impact on the societies involved is much greater. After all, relations between Muslims and Americans or IRA and the British aren't at that level.



Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
Why should it matter if people are killed over the course of several years compared to a day? Suppose the the 3000 people killed in 9/11 were killed over the course of a week. Can you honestly say that the extra 6 days it takes for those 3000 people to be killed will significantly change the impact their deaths will have on the world?

You speak of years vs. one day, then present an example of one day vs. one week. Huh?

The impact might not change much if it was one week vs. one day. It wouldn't change much if it was two events, killing 1500 with 30 years between them. However, if they, the terrorists, can maintain a state of terror, killing 3-4, injuring many others, every month, for 30 years, the psychological impact on the people is very different. Of course, I'm talking about the locals, on the world as a whole, I hardly think that the conflict between the IRA and Britain greatly affected the lives of the people living in Vladivostok.

What's the point? Time is a relevant factor, but not on its own.

Still, every single event is unique and playing which one is the bigger one, my wing-wing is better then yours, is totally stupid. Besides, what is worse? On what scale do we judge what event is worse then the other? Number of heads who died? The long-term impact? The effect on the world? Too many factors, too many variables involved. A waste of time trying to figure it out. It's better to consider every event as its own and analyze it as such, not vs. any other.


EDIT: In terms of world politics, there's probably no denial that 9/11 does have a bigger impact, but only in terms of world politics. As far as I know, there's no great ethnic hate between American Muslims and the other Americans.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.

Last edited by lukeiamyourdad; 10-26-2007 at 02:34 AM.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-26-2007, 02:00 PM   #28
Web Rider
Senior Member
 
Web Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: here
Posts: 1,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by True_Avery
Ok, thats taking it a little too far and if you are going to quote me do it right instead of putting in what you want to hear. I will report you next time you do it. You have been warned. But you brought up a good enough point that I'll still debate with you for the time being.
if that is what you must do.

Quote:
Yes, human suffering sucks. But, unfortunately, there are different levels of human suffering. Yes, it is horrible for a mother to have lost her child in 9/11. It will scar you for life and many never, ever get over it. But they still have a chance to move onto the next day and carry that one fear and one loss in their heart. Another mother in another country may have seen her child raped and killed in front of her while her husband lay bleeding in the corner from a bullet to the head, followed by her being pulled off to an internment camp. Both are terrible loses, but I'd still put my money on the second woman suffering more than the first. Both children are loses, and in the mothers eyes equal loses but there are degrees of suffering that follow. One can visit the site of her sons grave, mourn, and then go to the comfort of her home while the other cries in a corner over her child with the thought of possible not making it out alive herself by morning.

Besides, think about it. It may be a loss for them but how big of a loss is it for you? You don't know either of them and it is only when you are thinking about it that you probably really care about both of those children dying. While 9/11 was happening, people were already dying in sudan. Were you thinking about them, or the attacks on the twin towers on September 11th?

A death is a death. You are absolutely right. But some deaths have more effect on an individual society than they do across the world as a whole. They are still dead, and that is still tragic, but there are people that still care about an American dying than an Iraqi.

Another example:
I shoot the president.
I shoot a poor homeless child in an African slum.

Which one do you think the world is going to care about more? will the African child be all over the news or the death of the President? By some morals, they are equal. By the media and modern day society, the president matters more.

There are deaths going on right now and I can honestly say I do not care about them until they are someone of importance. If I think really hard, I realize people die every second of every minute. If I concentrated on every single one of those deaths and mourned equally for all of them... my mind would cave in on itself and I'd be looking for the nearest gun to jam in my mouth.

I don't know about you. You may have the ability to feel for every human that dies every single day. I, personally, could never handle that so I applaud you on your infinitely large heart and wish that more people like you could live day by day.

*Gives you a standing ovation.*
No, I don't have the ability to care for all those people, my only point was is that you can't dismiss any given kind of suffering, even if it's not as great as some other suffering. Suffering is part of being human, and when you dismiss one person's suffering, you are essentially saying that person doesn't matter.

Yes, there are horrible things going on in Africa, horrible things I can do nothing about. And while I feel bad for those people, I feel worse for people closer to me, even if they're on the other side of my country. I don't think it's right to put some country, horrible situation it may be in and all, ahead of caring for your own country. It's part of why I don't like cultural relativism and a number of other modern liberal concepts.

Who is important is dependent on the person you are asking. My mother is more important to me than the president. In fact my cousin who I barely know is more important to me than every elected official in the country. Someone else may say just the opposite. All I'm saying is that even if you feel that X suffering is more important than Y suffering, you can't dismiss it as irrelevant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
Do I need to restate my belief that time is irrelevant factor?
no, because you are wrong.


"So if you go to Washington, it's buildings clean and nice. Bring a pack of matches...and we'll burn the White House twice!"

"Nobody's talking about extermination. No one ever does. They just do it." - Magneto

"Don't solicit for your sister, that's not nice, unless you get a good percentage of her price."
Web Rider is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-26-2007, 02:26 PM   #29
Det. Bart Lasiter
obama.png
 
Det. Bart Lasiter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: `(•.°)~
Posts: 7,997
Current Game: all
Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lukeiamyourdad
You speak of years vs. one day, then present an example of one day vs. one week. Huh?
I can edit it to a time frame of your choice if you'd like.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Web Rider
no, because you are wrong.
oh ok.



"No, Mama. You can bet your sweet ass and half a titty whoever put that hit on you already got the cops in their back pocket." ~Black Dynamite
Det. Bart Lasiter is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-26-2007, 03:56 PM   #30
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmac7142
I can edit it to a time frame of your choice if you'd like.

It's only a question of comparing what's comparable.

In fact, as I pointed in an earlier post, editing the time would change something.

You have not refuted any arguments against yours, you're just there, saying your point is flawless, adding nothing more, not even trying to defend it.

EDIT: Frankly, this is it, I won't reply to anything related to time being relevant or irrelevant unless it contains some kind of more serious argumentation.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.

Last edited by lukeiamyourdad; 10-26-2007 at 04:14 PM.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-26-2007, 04:09 PM   #31
Corinthian
Banned
 
Corinthian's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,165
Are you seriously having a debate about which tragedy is the worst? World War II. 62,000,000 dead, approximately, uncountable numbers wounded, massive devastation across almost all of Europe and Asia. And if you want 'By Day', WW2 probably still tops the list with, on average, 28000 dead per day.
Corinthian is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-26-2007, 05:05 PM   #32
mimartin
TOR ate my KotOR
 
mimartin's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,025
Current Game: TOR/FO:NV
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Officer The Walking Carpets Guild Officer Alderaan News Holopics contributor 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lukeiamyourdad
If it's more or less tragic, I don't know, but if time can change the impact on people, yes.
I stand corrected time can make a difference in how people perceive an event (include as I posted earlier the time the victims have been alive). I was speaking more to the point that time does not make one victim more important or less important than the next.

I can see where time would make a difference, but it does not in my opinion make preventable and unnecessary deaths any less tragic. Example: Person A is inject with an incurable disease and will die in the future. Person B is shot in the head. Person C is raped repeatedly before being stabbed to death over a 10 day period. Person D is a three year old starves to death?

Which is more tragic? Is person A cursed or lucky to get a chance to say goodbye to their loved ones, but has to live with the fact that he/she will die? Is person B lucky that it was over quickly? Person C had a chance to live ten days longer than B, is that person lucky? Does the fact that D only lived a short time make it more tragic?

So I will agree with you that time can make a difference, but to me it is not an important component in judging a tragedy. I feel familiarity and circumstance are more important than time. The only time I look at is the age of the victims.

By the way I’m not debating which is more tragic. I’m saying it is up to each individual to decide which is more tragic to them. To me there is no wrong answer as every real example on this page is tragic.
mimartin is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-26-2007, 05:16 PM   #33
Point Man
Seeker of Truth
 
Point Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The People's Palace
Posts: 612
I would ask Doris Lessing to say that to the families of those who died. As mimartin pointed out, when the loss is close to you, it is devastating.


Show me a man who is twenty and not a liberal, and I will show you a man with no heart.
Show me a man who is forty and not a conservative, and I will show you a man with no brain.

Point Man is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-26-2007, 06:15 PM   #34
Totenkopf
English spoken in What
 
Totenkopf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: What?
Posts: 4,778
Imperialist Meatbags Guild Member The Walking Carpets Guild Member Forum Veteran 
At the objective level there are obvious traits that serve to make some events more tragic than others. These would include things like the time factor, circumstances that surround the event and the scope of death and destruction. So while a single family member's death may have greater impact on you personally than what happens across the globe (wars/famines/tsunamis), it doesn't make your loss a great tragedy, just a personal one (as painful as it might be). If someone exploded an H-Bomb over Tokyo tomorrow, I'm sure it would be considered far more tragic and catastrophic than the sum of all deaths/injuries/destroyed property in the 30 years of IRA terror cited by Lessing (or for that matter so far in the "war on terror"), even though it occurred in the span of a lazy afternoon.
Totenkopf is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-26-2007, 06:25 PM   #35
Corinthian
Banned
 
Corinthian's Avatar
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,165
True. But that makes sense. If someone nuked Tokyo, it'd result in the deaths of millions, cripple further millions, and put Japan's economy into the hole. As devastating as Terrorism can be, it wouldn't even scratch the surface of that.
Corinthian is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-26-2007, 06:40 PM   #36
El Sitherino
The Original.
 
El Sitherino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Planet Funkālnite.
Posts: 14,509
Hot Topic Starter LFN Staff Member Forum Veteran LF Jester 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lukeiamyourdad
What's the point? Time is a relevant factor, but not on its own.

The point people are missing is time has no impact on the tragedy of an event, simply the terror. A death is a tragedy, many deaths is a terrifying tragedy. The lingering feeling of death on the horizon is traumatizing, a tragic state but no tragedy itself.

And if you want to bring up the lingering feeling of death, then many people feel that no matter where they grow up. Be it Sudan or some ghetto in "civilized" US.

Globally neither makes any difference. Single events are the attention getters. And to counter one single event of a rather consistent ideological war with another is a foolish arguement. It's personal emotional rubbish.

"My sister's boyfriend beating her is more disturbing than yours because *..."

Not to pick you out of the lot LIAYD, your's was simply the first post I came across to bring up this point.

I personally do not see how anything can be debated in this topic.


“This body is not me. I am not caught in this body.
I am life without limit.”
El Sitherino is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-26-2007, 07:02 PM   #37
True_Avery
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Sitherino
The point people are missing is time has no impact on the tragedy of an event, simply the terror. A death is a tragedy, many deaths is a terrifying tragedy. The lingering feeling of death on the horizon is traumatizing, a tragic state but no tragedy itself.
I think thats the best summary of my feelings on this so far.
True_Avery is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-26-2007, 07:32 PM   #38
tk102
Well past expiration date
 
tk102's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 5,765
Current Game: Assassin's Creed 4
Forum Veteran Helpful! Notable contributor 
Meta-discussion

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Sitherino
I personally do not see how anything can be debated in this topic.
Yet we love to jibber jabber. I've updated the thread title to better reflect the topic. It's kind of different topic-- whether tragedy is objective or subjective in nature, how time-intensive or extensive a tragedy is, etc.


tk102 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-26-2007, 10:19 PM   #39
Web Rider
Senior Member
 
Web Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: here
Posts: 1,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Sitherino
I personally do not see how anything can be debated in this topic.
too often we get caught up in looking for some kind of end-all answer when a topic comes up. Sometimes it's nice to just express your opinion and hear what other people think of a given subject. You might learn something, you might not, that's life.


"So if you go to Washington, it's buildings clean and nice. Bring a pack of matches...and we'll burn the White House twice!"

"Nobody's talking about extermination. No one ever does. They just do it." - Magneto

"Don't solicit for your sister, that's not nice, unless you get a good percentage of her price."
Web Rider is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 10-27-2007, 01:56 AM   #40
lukeiamyourdad
Using Teletraan I
 
lukeiamyourdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal, Québec, Canada
Posts: 8,274
LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Sitherino
(1)The point people are missing is time has no impact on the tragedy of an event, simply the terror. A death is a tragedy, many deaths is a terrifying tragedy. The lingering feeling of death on the horizon is traumatizing, a tragic state but no tragedy itself.

(2)And if you want to bring up the lingering feeling of death, then many people feel that no matter where they grow up. Be it Sudan or some ghetto in "civilized" US.

(3)Globally neither makes any difference. Single events are the attention getters. And to counter one single event of a rather consistent ideological war with another is a foolish arguement. It's personal emotional rubbish.

"My sister's boyfriend beating her is more disturbing than yours because *..."

Not to pick you out of the lot LIAYD, your's was simply the first post I came across to bring up this point.

I personally do not see how anything can be debated in this topic.
1- Well, the post I was responding too, spoke of the impact on the world and time not being a factor. Time can change the impact, it makes it a whole different event or global situation. I agree that whether it makes something more tragic or not, it changes nothing simply because, as I've stated, you can't judge how tragic an event is. It's entirely subjective and we agree on this.

2- Ghetto violence everywhere around the world is very different then terrorism which is what the two situations being compare have in common, the only thing they have in common as a matter of facts. The poor, unfortunately, live with this fear and can somehow survive in it. Against terrorist fear, it's a different situation. I guess the only way I can elaborate on this before I think more about it is how ghetto violence doesn't cause as much collateral damage as terrorism does, knowing that a terror bombing actually wants to get as many as possible. I guess the randomness, the idea of dying without any kind of warning whatsoever makes it more powerful to the people.


3- We absolutely agree on this. It's pointless, it's a question of personal subjectivity. There's no wrong answer when it comes to opinions.

And yes, history books will record attention grabbers more then other events.




I think there was some confusion, perhaps on my part, on what tragedy is considered here. I guess I was trying to simply analyze the event based on the impact it had on the societies involved. The impact of an event is something that can be observed but the "tragic level" is something that, in my views and I have seen nothing to make me believe otherwise, cannot be measured objectively.

Why do I speak of societies involved? The people in Vladivostok weren't affected by the IRA-England war, neither were they affected by the Tsunami. As cold as it sounds, regular Russian guy doesn't give a rat's ass. He might have heard of it in the news, but beyond that, he can't really cry for the deaths, unless he has friends or family involved. So trying to put this on a global level is not very possible.


http://www.marioramos.ca/ -A friend of mine and an aspiring filmmaker.
lukeiamyourdad is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > Knights of the Old Republic > Community > Kavar's Corner > It's Nobel Stupdity Week. (aka comparing tragedies)

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:46 PM.

LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.