larry_boy_44
Footballguy
I don't see how you can separate them in theory without invalidating what you say...not harming others is altruistic (the opposite of selfish)...
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
World's Greatest Draft (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
Orange Crush
Footballguy
So, according to your logic, since Plato philosophized that the best form of government had one person with absolute power at the top, he should be blamed for the actions of every dictator in history.
thatguy
Footballguy
Think of it more from a standpoint of financial well-being and accumulation of wealth, and not so much in terms of acting on impulsive inclinations to kill, rape, steal, etc. In theory, the two can be separated. However, again, you can't really separate them in practice, for man is far too complex an animal.
timschochet
Footballguy
I realize that my answer to you is going to get me into more trouble than I'm in already with a lot of people here, but here goes:1. Stalin and Hitler were both collectivists. Both men believed that man should live for the state, and they imposed this will on the people they governed. Whether the government is National Socialist or Communist, the essential theme is the same: the individual has no value.2. To the extent that Jesus and Plato have some of these same ideas, yes, their teachings are evil, or at least not helpful to the advancement of mankind. I do not know why Jesus taught that most rich men should be condemned simply for being rich, for example. But I do not claim to be an expert on the teachings of either man, so I won't go any further in this regard. Same with the Buddha.3. I have no idea what Gandhi's views were regarding how to form a political society, or on collectivism. His main issue seemed to be the ill-effects of colonialism in his native lands.I support love and peace and I try to be a charitable person. None of this is evil. But I believe that man should behave by acting upon his own rational self-interest. This for me is the moral good.
Last edited by a moderator:
larry_boy_44
Footballguy
I feel like you are repeatedly contradicting yourself here...and the reason Jesus said rich people were evil is not because having a lot is evil, its because its very evil to have power (and money is power) without becoming corrupted... (something like that...)also... charity is NOT in your own personal self-interest... in case you weren't aware of that...
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
Only those who have heard of him. But yes, to the extent that people read Plato and decide his ideas make sense, and these same people go on to support a dictatorship with all the misery it brings, then Plato is in some ways responsible.
the moops
Footballguy
Not only that, but the USSR and China did not, and do not have an "each according to his ability, to each according to his need", marxist philosophy. Communism definitely took many of its ideals from marxism, but it is not marxism.
larry_boy_44
Footballguy
but Plato didn't support evil dictators... He supported good, moral, philosopher kings...HUGE difference...
just like there is a huge difference between the idealism of Marxism and the evils of communism...
the moops
Footballguy
This is ridiculous tim.
timschochet
Footballguy
I could paste a lot of arguments defending my position here, not only by you know who but by several thinkers throughout the centuries who have been skeptical of altruism and collectivism as ideals to be admired. But I think the argument is pretty clear, whether you agree with it or not. If anyone's interested, there's plenty of sources out there.
timschochet
Footballguy
Is it? My whole point, when discussing the root of evil, is not the idea that an bad man should take power over others, or that freedom should be curtailed in favor of dictatorship. Both of these are bad, but they are not, IMO, at the root of evil. At the root is any person who tells you that man should live for his brothers. Anyone who writes this or argues this or practices this throughout history is, in my opinion, creating evil whether they know it or not.
thatguy
Footballguy
Tim, it might help if you define evil, without getting into what constitutes evil. What are the characteristics, the results, the impact, of an act, behavior, or belief that is at its very roots evil.
larry_boy_44
Footballguy
how does that make sense to you?Hitler, Stalin, and Mao did NOT actually live collectively... They took a HUGE chunk of stuff for themselves and split the meager rest with everyone else...IF everyone actually buys into collectivism, it works and everyone is taken care of and happy... The problem is that not everyone will...But that isn't collectivism's fault, its the fault of greed and selfishness...You are blaming the good, moral, caring person for the evil, selfish, greedy person's sins...
timschochet
Footballguy
Anyway guys, this is fun, and I don't want to be accused of not responding, but I have to take off for several hours.
I acknowledge that my views on altruism, collectivism, and selfishness are a minority opinion, and always will be.
I acknowledge that my views on altruism, collectivism, and selfishness are a minority opinion, and always will be.
thatguy
Footballguy
But evil, and how we define it, is at the very root of the argument. You can't separate this argument from what is evil.
Abrantes
Footballguy
Truly. But, as I stated earlier, it seems preposterous to declare either of those things as "the root of all evil". It's possible to make a reasonable argument without resorting to hyperbole or oversimplifications.
Last edited by a moderator:
thatguy
Footballguy
Agreed. But we're talking two very polarizing extremes here. The truth is somewhere in the middle, I'm sure. Though where exactly the truth lies, I care little. I have no horse here.
larry_boy_44
Footballguy
I agree... but that still doesn't explain how he blames the people who mean well for the destruction caused by those who don't mean well and take advantage of those who do mean well...
timschochet
Footballguy
Both actually. Intentions in terms of the person, results in terms of the ideas.Go back and see if I ever wrote that Marx was evil. I wrote that his ideas were evil, and I believe they are. That's why I would not mind seeing him as a villain, though way down on the list. Because from what I know, I think Marx had good intentions, whereas the upper level villains had very evil intentions.
I think ideas should be evaluated based on their application, and if bad things always happen, then those ideas are evil. I think that people can be classified by intent.
However, if someone these days argues for a Marxist system, knowing what the results have been throughout history, then I think this person probably has a more malevolent intent than Marx did.
Orange Crush
Footballguy
Women take up both our time and money: Women = time * money
However, time is money: time = money
So Women = money * money, or money^2
But money is the root of all evil: money = √evil
So Women = money^2, or (√evil)^2
∴ Women = evil. QED.
However, time is money: time = money
So Women = money * money, or money^2
But money is the root of all evil: money = √evil
So Women = money^2, or (√evil)^2
∴ Women = evil. QED.
Mario Kart
Footballguy
Why do you hate evil?
larry_boy_44
Footballguy
but none of the governments you describe actually applied true Marxism...
larry_boy_44
Footballguy
flysack
Footballguy
This argument would be a lot more tolerable if people weren't so fascinated with the word 'evil'.
Exactly what I was thinking, and why I didn't bother entering the fray. The whole thing is
thatguy
Footballguy
Larry, I have to ask, how did you not realize the length of the book until after you'd purchased it?And knowing what I know of you, don't bother reading it. You'll hate it.
larry_boy_44
Footballguy
bought a bunch of book's online and it was one of the one's I bought because I recognized the title... didn't bother to look at how many pages it had until after I got it... lol
Big Rocks
Footballguy
I am shocked that this guy is still here, as he's one of the first people I think of in this category
3.11 Charles Dickens, Novelist
Influencing many novelists later on, he was the most popular author in the Victorian Era. Among his most famous novels include A Christmas Carol, Oliver Twist, A Tale of Two Cities, David Copperfield, Great Expectations, Little Dorrit, and Bleak House. His full bio covering other parts of his life is here.
3.11 Charles Dickens, Novelist
Influencing many novelists later on, he was the most popular author in the Victorian Era. Among his most famous novels include A Christmas Carol, Oliver Twist, A Tale of Two Cities, David Copperfield, Great Expectations, Little Dorrit, and Bleak House. His full bio covering other parts of his life is here.
Ozymandias
Footballguy
One great problem with Marxism is that Marxists believe that the end justifies the means. And insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results. XXXXX, XXXXX, Mao, XXX XXX, XX XXX XXXX, XXXXXX...Murder (100+ million dead good enough for an experiment?), imprisonment, torture, muzzled press, scarcity of food and goods, running a prison camp that people are not allowed to escape--because they have escaped by their millions when they could. Don't give me "well, it's never been really tried" crap.
Last edited by a moderator:
higgins
Footballguy
While Columbus is the most instantly familiar explorer, there are only a few at the top of the heap imo. How many people did the others lean on in their travels? Marco Polo was one of a few, and he traveled the silk roads all the way to courts of Kublai Khan. My personal #1 in the category...
3.12 -- Marco Polo, Explorer.
Opening eyes in the Dark Ages
The groundbreaking 24-year journey of Venetian explorer Marco Polo (1254-1324) unveiled a whole new world to Europeans of the Middle Ages. And it inspired the great explorers of future generations, not the least of which was Christopher Columbus, who was seeking the riches of the Far East when he landed in the Americas in 1492.
Travel log: Eight war zones. 20 visas, 17 countries, and 33,000 miles. That's what it would take if you wanted to retrace Polo's journey today. Of course, the dangers of today couldn't begin to compare to the perils of traveling the Silk Route from Europe to the Far East and back 700 years ago.
Early adventures: Just 17 years old when he, his father, Niccolo, and uncle, Maffeo, hit the road, the Polo trio sailed across the Adriatic and Mediterranean seas, a voyage that alone was bold because at the time monsters were believed to dwell in the sea. Outside Jerusalem, they took holy water from Jesus's tomb to deliver to the great Mongol ruler Kublai Kahn. Then it was off to Turkey, where Polo met knightly crusaders whom he'd dreamed about as a young boy. They slept in the shadow of Mount Ararat, where legend said Noah's Ark landed after the flood. All the while, Polo took detailed notes on the landscape, the people, and the rugs, jewels, and other goods that they encountered along the way. Despite the threat of bandits, they crossed the oppressively hot Persian desert (now the nations of Iran and Iraq) and climbed the mountains of present-day Afghanistan. They met Buddhists, Jews, Hindus, and Zoroastrians, among others. They traded for spices, pearls, linen embroidered with gold, ivory tusks, and other goods brought to them from India. Continuing their way towards the southeast, they crossed Pamir--a land of glacier-clad peaks of 20,000 feet that the natives called the Roof of the World. Their route led them over the old southern caravan route through Kashmir, a place that would not be visited again by Europeans for another 600 years.
For the history books: Three years after their journey began, they arrived at their destination, the summer residence of the great Kublai Kahn, whose marble palace featured gilded rooms and beautiful paintings. For 17 years Polo remained there, working as an emissary for the ruler of China. When the three men finally returned to Venice after a 24-year absence, according to legend, their own families didn't recognize them. Of course, their relatives wised up when the three men opened their bags full of diamonds, rubies, and gold.
Words to live by: The story of this remarkable journey nearly went unrecorded. Luckily, for us if not him, Polo was captured during a war and sent to prison. Behind bars, he met a writer of romance stories who listened to Polo's tales and recorded them in a book called The Travels of Marco Polo, which remains one of the greatest travelogues of all time. While some scholars have argued that Polo made up much of his tale, the great traveler's death-bed words speak volumes: "I only told half of the extraordinary things that occurred to me in this amazing life."
eta Bonus pic
3.12 -- Marco Polo, Explorer.
Opening eyes in the Dark Ages
The groundbreaking 24-year journey of Venetian explorer Marco Polo (1254-1324) unveiled a whole new world to Europeans of the Middle Ages. And it inspired the great explorers of future generations, not the least of which was Christopher Columbus, who was seeking the riches of the Far East when he landed in the Americas in 1492.
Travel log: Eight war zones. 20 visas, 17 countries, and 33,000 miles. That's what it would take if you wanted to retrace Polo's journey today. Of course, the dangers of today couldn't begin to compare to the perils of traveling the Silk Route from Europe to the Far East and back 700 years ago.
Early adventures: Just 17 years old when he, his father, Niccolo, and uncle, Maffeo, hit the road, the Polo trio sailed across the Adriatic and Mediterranean seas, a voyage that alone was bold because at the time monsters were believed to dwell in the sea. Outside Jerusalem, they took holy water from Jesus's tomb to deliver to the great Mongol ruler Kublai Kahn. Then it was off to Turkey, where Polo met knightly crusaders whom he'd dreamed about as a young boy. They slept in the shadow of Mount Ararat, where legend said Noah's Ark landed after the flood. All the while, Polo took detailed notes on the landscape, the people, and the rugs, jewels, and other goods that they encountered along the way. Despite the threat of bandits, they crossed the oppressively hot Persian desert (now the nations of Iran and Iraq) and climbed the mountains of present-day Afghanistan. They met Buddhists, Jews, Hindus, and Zoroastrians, among others. They traded for spices, pearls, linen embroidered with gold, ivory tusks, and other goods brought to them from India. Continuing their way towards the southeast, they crossed Pamir--a land of glacier-clad peaks of 20,000 feet that the natives called the Roof of the World. Their route led them over the old southern caravan route through Kashmir, a place that would not be visited again by Europeans for another 600 years.
For the history books: Three years after their journey began, they arrived at their destination, the summer residence of the great Kublai Kahn, whose marble palace featured gilded rooms and beautiful paintings. For 17 years Polo remained there, working as an emissary for the ruler of China. When the three men finally returned to Venice after a 24-year absence, according to legend, their own families didn't recognize them. Of course, their relatives wised up when the three men opened their bags full of diamonds, rubies, and gold.
Words to live by: The story of this remarkable journey nearly went unrecorded. Luckily, for us if not him, Polo was captured during a war and sent to prison. Behind bars, he met a writer of romance stories who listened to Polo's tales and recorded them in a book called The Travels of Marco Polo, which remains one of the greatest travelogues of all time. While some scholars have argued that Polo made up much of his tale, the great traveler's death-bed words speak volumes: "I only told half of the extraordinary things that occurred to me in this amazing life."
eta Bonus pic
Last edited by a moderator:
Fennis
Footballguy
Fish out of water!
larry_boy_44
Footballguy
I haven't read Marx... so please enlighten me...Where in Marx's writing did he suggest prison camps and genocide? Where did Marx say to starve the people?
thatguy
Footballguy
Nice pick. Top 3 in the category. Did you PM JML?
Ozymandias
Footballguy
You're right. It's just that the apologists tend to make my blood boil.
Mario Kart
Footballguy
It was a toss up between Chaucer and Dickens for me. I liked the transition that Chaucer did though.
Mario Kart
Footballguy
I went from Magellan to Polo to finally picking Carpini. Again, I liked the originator of Carpini compared to the people that followed him.
flysack
Footballguy
I'm sorry Marx makes your blood boil.
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
What drivel.What Marx wrote was perfectly fine.Work together for the common good.As applied, not so much.Can think of a few other books that have been put poorly into practice
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
I proudly agree with larry
D_House
Footballguy
Not only is larryboy having an uncharacteristically great draft, but he's the voice of reason for once.
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
D_House
Footballguy
Dickens is a trip. I'm presently reading (and really enjoying) David Copperfield. His characters are all so larger-than life, and his influence on the English novel is huge. And he's not as dreary or impenetrable as some of the Russian greats that often get listed before him.
John Maddens Lunchbox
Footballguy
Arsenal of Doom
Footballguy
This is one of the people I had in mind when I commented that I hope consideration is given to the influence of popularity over time. Dickens probably doesn't fare as well against the other grading criteria, but his infuence on our culture has probably been as large as any writer can claim.
mad sweeney
Footballguy
Even Watt? I have been catching a little flack from one of my trusted advisers for "reaching" for him. I disagree obviously and I am glad to have a little back up to bolster me. The more I read about him the more I thought that his biggest inventions were every bit as big as Gutenberg's one biggie and his body of work could surpass or at least rival Edison. It was one of those quantum steps every couple of generations that gave steampower to fuel the Industrial Revolution that transformed the modern world.
Similar threads
