American missionary tries to convert indigenous island people; receives the Magellan treatment
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
splashmtn
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3961

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 10:33 am    Post subject:

governator wrote:
splashmtn wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
And therein lies the difficult issue with faith, because it is nearly impossible to keep it solely in one's own personal space entirely.
No. its not faith. its any knowledge of any kind. any belief of any kind. People really act like its just religion where this takes place. its not.

religion is a knowledge base of things some people belief are true.

at the end of the day its information. you can choose to keep the info to yourself or attempt to spread it. Now the question is, how do you attempt to spread it? By Force? or in some other manner.

if the missionary was there to teach them math or science there wouldnt be any difference. He would think he had knowledge to give that they did not possess and he wouldnt know for sure if that was true until he contacted them or had some other person do so and report back.


It's a simple question of should one spread what they perceive to be good knowledge(assuming if you're not doing so by force)? Yes or No.


Math and Science has facts/evidence supporting the belief while religion is a belief without requiring supporting facts/evidence... not the same


math and science has supporting evidence based on other previous info from other previous humans who can have many errors. which is what science is all about to actual scientists not us armchair scientists that think its 100% gospel truth. But again, that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

You're talking about whether YOU think something is truly the TRUTH or FACT. thats not relevant to my point. My point was simple. People think they have knowledge of something. They have a choice to keep this knowledge or pass it on. if they choose to pass it on, do they do so by force or by other means. Thats true for any knowledge. It has nothing to do with religion.

The only reason you and I can speak today is because someone passed on knowledge. some by force, some by choice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67312
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 10:36 am    Post subject:

splashmtn wrote:
jodeke wrote:
splashmtn wrote:
jodeke wrote:
Huey Lewis & The News wrote:
jodeke wrote:
"these people"[/u][/i] is demeaning to me.


how the (bleep) could that phrase be demeaning?

I said to me. It's demeaning because Black people are referred to as these/you people.
they are referred in that manner because white racist people have used that as a dog whistle/code word for N-words. Now jo already knows I'm not using those two words "these people" to mean anything derogatory about the tribe. For one. I'm black. so the "these people" coming from me can't have the same negative connotation that it has when its said by racist white people. There's a history behind that phrase in that regard. there is no history behind black people saying it when referring to a tribe. Context is key.

That's what I'm hearing a dog whistle. I'm not tagging you for the phrase.
thats because your ears are wide open to that sound. i get it. and I understand it. Just remember, the context means everything. There is a time and a place to say these people and those people which isnt meant to be negative in any way.

Damn, I'm agreeing with splashmtn. I'm probably being overly sensitive. @DMR, I concede your position on context Used in context with the article I'm wearing blinders.
Quote:
The words aren't demeaning. They can be used in demeaning fashion in some contexts, but the words "these people" are not demeaning in and of themselves without a context that makes them so, whether you say "to me" or not.

It's like saying "ape" is a demeaning word simply because some have used it in derogatory way..
That's the KBCB in me surfacing.
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.


Last edited by jodeke on Tue Nov 27, 2018 12:35 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 24994

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 10:48 am    Post subject:

splashmtn wrote:
governator wrote:
splashmtn wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
And therein lies the difficult issue with faith, because it is nearly impossible to keep it solely in one's own personal space entirely.
No. its not faith. its any knowledge of any kind. any belief of any kind. People really act like its just religion where this takes place. its not.

religion is a knowledge base of things some people belief are true.

at the end of the day its information. you can choose to keep the info to yourself or attempt to spread it. Now the question is, how do you attempt to spread it? By Force? or in some other manner.

if the missionary was there to teach them math or science there wouldnt be any difference. He would think he had knowledge to give that they did not possess and he wouldnt know for sure if that was true until he contacted them or had some other person do so and report back.


It's a simple question of should one spread what they perceive to be good knowledge(assuming if you're not doing so by force)? Yes or No.


Math and Science has facts/evidence supporting the belief while religion is a belief without requiring supporting facts/evidence... not the same


math and science has supporting evidence based on other previous info from other previous humans who can have many errors. which is what science is all about to actual scientists not us armchair scientists that think its 100% gospel truth. But again, that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

You're talking about whether YOU think something is truly the TRUTH or FACT. thats not relevant to my point. My point was simple. People think they have knowledge of something. They have a choice to keep this knowledge or pass it on. if they choose to pass it on, do they do so by force or by other means. Thats true for any knowledge. It has nothing to do with religion.

The only reason you and I can speak today is because someone passed on knowledge. some by force, some by choice.


Still not the same. Science/math regarless of two groups of people that never met will be the same because it's factual. Religion is different than science. religion is in the same belief as animism, agnotism
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
splashmtn
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2016
Posts: 3961

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 11:09 am    Post subject:

governator wrote:
splashmtn wrote:
governator wrote:
splashmtn wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
And therein lies the difficult issue with faith, because it is nearly impossible to keep it solely in one's own personal space entirely.
No. its not faith. its any knowledge of any kind. any belief of any kind. People really act like its just religion where this takes place. its not.

religion is a knowledge base of things some people belief are true.

at the end of the day its information. you can choose to keep the info to yourself or attempt to spread it. Now the question is, how do you attempt to spread it? By Force? or in some other manner.

if the missionary was there to teach them math or science there wouldnt be any difference. He would think he had knowledge to give that they did not possess and he wouldnt know for sure if that was true until he contacted them or had some other person do so and report back.


It's a simple question of should one spread what they perceive to be good knowledge(assuming if you're not doing so by force)? Yes or No.


Math and Science has facts/evidence supporting the belief while religion is a belief without requiring supporting facts/evidence... not the same


math and science has supporting evidence based on other previous info from other previous humans who can have many errors. which is what science is all about to actual scientists not us armchair scientists that think its 100% gospel truth. But again, that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.

You're talking about whether YOU think something is truly the TRUTH or FACT. thats not relevant to my point. My point was simple. People think they have knowledge of something. They have a choice to keep this knowledge or pass it on. if they choose to pass it on, do they do so by force or by other means. Thats true for any knowledge. It has nothing to do with religion.

The only reason you and I can speak today is because someone passed on knowledge. some by force, some by choice.


Still not the same. Science/math regarless of two groups of people that never met will be the same because it's factual. Religion is different than science. religion is in the same belief as animism, agnotism
It's still not changing my original point. no matter what you or I think of religion or science to those people with the belief of or no belief of. they can choose to keep that info to themselves or pass it on. how they pass it on is the question at hand.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13811
Location: Boulder ;)

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 1:55 pm    Post subject:

I sincerely believe the news needs to represent him as

American Trespasser not Missionary

I feel for him that he had to die but I'd wager
if people calm down they'll see he was either
suicidal or suffering from mental disease

He was like a kid willing to go hang out with the lions
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Tue Nov 27, 2018 2:37 pm    Post subject:

ContagiousInspiration wrote:
I sincerely believe the news needs to represent him as

American Trespasser not Missionary

I feel for him that he had to die but I'd wager
if people calm down they'll see he was either
suicidal or suffering from mental disease

He was like a kid willing to go hang out with the lions


Only because he’s American.

If it’s a non-American trespassing, then we’d use different terms for the same thing. Weird and lame.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67312
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 12:19 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
ContagiousInspiration wrote:
I sincerely believe the news needs to represent him as

American Trespasser not Missionary

I feel for him that he had to die but I'd wager
if people calm down they'll see he was either
suicidal or suffering from mental disease

He was like a kid willing to go hang out with the lions


Only because he’s American.

If it’s a non-American trespassing, then we’d use different terms for the same thing. Weird and lame.

How would he be, is he, termed in media other than American? In your media?
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 1:01 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
ContagiousInspiration wrote:
I sincerely believe the news needs to represent him as

American Trespasser not Missionary

I feel for him that he had to die but I'd wager
if people calm down they'll see he was either
suicidal or suffering from mental disease

He was like a kid willing to go hang out with the lions


Only because he’s American.

If it’s a non-American trespassing, then we’d use different terms for the same thing. Weird and lame.

How would he be, is he, termed in media other than American? In your media?


I was referring to CI’s desire to label the man a trespasser rather than a missionary.

We think it is ok to say these kinds of things but only when the person is American.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67312
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 1:41 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
jodeke wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
ContagiousInspiration wrote:
I sincerely believe the news needs to represent him as

American Trespasser not Missionary

I feel for him that he had to die but I'd wager
if people calm down they'll see he was either
suicidal or suffering from mental disease

He was like a kid willing to go hang out with the lions


Only because he’s American.

If it’s a non-American trespassing, then we’d use different terms for the same thing. Weird and lame.

How would he be, is he, termed in media other than American? In your media?


I was referring to CI’s desire to label the man a trespasser rather than a missionary.

We think it is ok to say these kinds of things but only when the person is American.


He's both, a trespasser and a missionary. What media are you referring to when you say "we"?
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13811
Location: Boulder ;)

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 1:44 pm    Post subject:

US media will make sure he is a missionary

He is first a Trespasser then a possible mental patient then a missionary

Who all had a deathwish
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 3:08 pm    Post subject:

jodeke wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
jodeke wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
ContagiousInspiration wrote:
I sincerely believe the news needs to represent him as

American Trespasser not Missionary

I feel for him that he had to die but I'd wager
if people calm down they'll see he was either
suicidal or suffering from mental disease

He was like a kid willing to go hang out with the lions


Only because he’s American.

If it’s a non-American trespassing, then we’d use different terms for the same thing. Weird and lame.

How would he be, is he, termed in media other than American? In your media?


I was referring to CI’s desire to label the man a trespasser rather than a missionary.

We think it is ok to say these kinds of things but only when the person is American.


He's both, a trespasser and a missionary. What media are you referring to when you say "we"?


Sure. And a trespasser is anyone that comes in to this country, and any other country, without proper permission from that country.

But I just don't see the point in labeling people in this way and certainly don't agree with a mindset in which it applies only when you're an American.

If we're going to call them all trespassers, fine, do that, I'm just wondering what the purpose of that is exactly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67312
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 3:42 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
jodeke wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
jodeke wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
ContagiousInspiration wrote:
I sincerely believe the news needs to represent him as

American Trespasser not Missionary

I feel for him that he had to die but I'd wager
if people calm down they'll see he was either
suicidal or suffering from mental disease

He was like a kid willing to go hang out with the lions


Only because he’s American.

If it’s a non-American trespassing, then we’d use different terms for the same thing. Weird and lame.

How would he be, is he, termed in media other than American? In your media?


I was referring to CI’s desire to label the man a trespasser rather than a missionary.

We think it is ok to say these kinds of things but only when the person is American.


He's both, a trespasser and a missionary. What media are you referring to when you say "we"?


Sure. And a trespasser is anyone that comes in to this country, and any other country, without proper permission from that country.

But I just don't see the point in labeling people in this way and certainly don't agree with a mindset in which it applies only when you're an American.

If we're going to call them all trespassers, fine, do that, I'm just wondering what the purpose of that is exactly.

Are you saying he's called a missionary by the American media because he's American and would be called a trespasser if he weren't?

Have you read any articles on the subject by other countries media?

Do you live in America?
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16018

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 5:15 pm    Post subject:

adkindo wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
That's a completely failed analogy.


It is a failed analogy because you are refusing to examine your perspective....in my opinion. I think there are a lot of interesting debates and points of discussion from this situation, that probably should result in mixed opinions.

First, is it ok or should it be an option for a population to totally segregate from the rest of society? We definitely do not allow that in the United States. We would never allow the people of Key West to blow up the US-1 bridge, refuse to pay taxes or adhere to federal laws (trust me, if we would allow it, they would have already done it ) . How many times have we sent in armed agencies when a religious sect appeared to be "off the grid"? Honestly, I do not want to go down that path and debate each one on the merits, but the point is what is taking place there is not an option. We use lack of education, proper nutrition, child endangerment, etc. as excuses to roll in tanks and blackhawks if we get a hint of a population secluding itself in America.....and all of those arguments could be made about that population. Are those children better off secluded on the island? Are they given proper care or are they being abused per common human standards? Do they have access to proper healthcare when needed....or are they simply dying from simple viruses?


Very interesting take re: child welfare
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jodeke
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Nov 2007
Posts: 67312
Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 5:30 pm    Post subject:

adkindo wrote:

Quote:
First, is it ok or should it be an option for a population to totally segregate from the rest of society?

We definitely do not allow that in the United States. We would never allow the people of Key West to blow up the US-1 bridge, refuse to pay taxes or adhere to federal laws (trust me, if we would allow it, they would have already done it

Yes it's ok. Who are we or any to decide whether or not a people can choose to live their isolated way of life. Look around. Country's that allow intervention are at war.

You're comparing the United States to a Island government. A Island that's been independent for 60,000 years. Disconnect from all country's. They don't want outsiders. Who are we or any to say they have to allow us to intervene. Their government says they can remain isolated.

We can't walk or drive to this island. We have to go out of our way to go to a place where we're not wanted. To bring a way of life that's not wanted. What's wrong with that picture?
_________________
Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.


Last edited by jodeke on Wed Nov 28, 2018 7:34 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16018

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 5:45 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
non-player zealot wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:


The difference between Capital Punishment and this instance is that the missionary's death is a direct result of his actions, like someone jumping into the tiger enclosure at the zoo. You know there is a probability that you will get attacked and if so, death is the likely outcome. That is a function of circumstance tied directly to the act itself as opposed to a punitive action that is taken by a later that is not directly tied to the act.


Or the bear dude who whispered to bears, encroached upon bears, placed himself among bears, and was killed and eaten by bears.


That's actually a very good example. Grizzly Man demonstrated the same kind of cavalier arrogance we are talking about here. He knowingly ventured into bear territory understanding the power and potential of the bears to kill. He foolishly treated the bears as if they were beasts that could be tamed by him. He, under those circumstances, not only brought about his own death, but the death of his girlfriend whom he took on his venture deep into bear country. That decision is on him. He is responsible for the fates of he and his girlfriend, and his fate was unfortunate, but warranted. It was warranted in the sense that he was extremely negligent, the outcome was completely predictable and put others at risk, including the bears, two of which were killed by rangers after he and his girlfriend were found dead.

I think the mistake some people are making here when they see some of us say this missionary's death was "deserved" is thy are thinking in the draconian, revenge sense of the word rather than the simple deductive sense of it. For example, no one wants to see someone burned by a flame, but if someone puts their hand in that flame and gets burned, that burn was deserved. It's not cruel or repulsive to acknowledge that fact. It's simply logic.


If there are 2 possible meanings for the word “deserved,” why would it be a mistake for people to read into one of the two meanings?

Isn’t the mistake on the person using a word with ambiguous meanings?

And re: the draconian sense of the word and revenge - it seems alot of why you think he “deserved” what he got was based on how his decision potentially affected the tribe. You brought up things like - potential disease, against the law, religious arrogance...

That’s not analogous to putting your hand in a flame which is just simple stupidity.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52624
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 6:14 pm    Post subject:

LongBeachPoly wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
non-player zealot wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:


The difference between Capital Punishment and this instance is that the missionary's death is a direct result of his actions, like someone jumping into the tiger enclosure at the zoo. You know there is a probability that you will get attacked and if so, death is the likely outcome. That is a function of circumstance tied directly to the act itself as opposed to a punitive action that is taken by a later that is not directly tied to the act.


Or the bear dude who whispered to bears, encroached upon bears, placed himself among bears, and was killed and eaten by bears.


That's actually a very good example. Grizzly Man demonstrated the same kind of cavalier arrogance we are talking about here. He knowingly ventured into bear territory understanding the power and potential of the bears to kill. He foolishly treated the bears as if they were beasts that could be tamed by him. He, under those circumstances, not only brought about his own death, but the death of his girlfriend whom he took on his venture deep into bear country. That decision is on him. He is responsible for the fates of he and his girlfriend, and his fate was unfortunate, but warranted. It was warranted in the sense that he was extremely negligent, the outcome was completely predictable and put others at risk, including the bears, two of which were killed by rangers after he and his girlfriend were found dead.

I think the mistake some people are making here when they see some of us say this missionary's death was "deserved" is thy are thinking in the draconian, revenge sense of the word rather than the simple deductive sense of it. For example, no one wants to see someone burned by a flame, but if someone puts their hand in that flame and gets burned, that burn was deserved. It's not cruel or repulsive to acknowledge that fact. It's simply logic.


If there are 2 possible meanings for the word “deserved,” why would it be a mistake for people to read into one of the two meanings?

Isn’t the mistake on the person using a word with ambiguous meanings?


I also used the word "warranted". The intent of my point was quiet clear.

Quote:
And re: the draconian sense of the word and revenge - it seems alot of why you think he “deserved” what he got was based on how his decision potentially affected the tribe. You brought up things like - potential disease, against the law, religious arrogance...

That’s not analogous to putting your hand in a flame which is just simple stupidity.


Attempting to land on an island where you know the inhabitants will kill you is absolutely analogous to putting your hand in the flame in regards to the sheer stupidity it demonstrates.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerLanny
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 24 Oct 2001
Posts: 47565

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 8:58 pm    Post subject:

I am fascinated about this tribe, found this to be a good read:

https://theamericanscholar.org/the-last-island-of-the-savages/#.W_9xuYtKit8
_________________
Love, Laker Lanny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16018

PostPosted: Wed Nov 28, 2018 11:46 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
I also used the word "warranted". The intent of my point was quiet clear.


Are you speaking for yourself or for everyone? You said lots of people have problems w/ the word deserved. It’s been thrown around by many here. Is everyone using it in your sense?


DaMuleRules wrote:
Attempting to land on an island where you know the inhabitants will kill you is absolutely analogous to putting your hand in the flame in regards to the sheer stupidity it demonstrates.


It would be analogous if you simply stopped there. Guy lands on an island, gets killed by indigenous people known to kill others who’ve landed on the island. The end.

You went on to expound on how wrong he was for even trying to land on the island - disease spreading, illegal, religious arrogance. This part is not analogous to putting your hand in a flame. This part makes the “deserved” aspect sound like a punishment for his wrong doings.

There’s nothing wrong about putting your hand in a flame, other than being stupid.

If you say he deserved his fate because he took a stupid life risking stunt, no one will argue.

If you say he deserved to die because what he did was wrong, I think people have a problem with that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2018 7:42 am    Post subject:

I wouldn't agree that a person deserves their fate because they took a stupid life risking stunt. It all depends on the motivation for taking on that stunt. The motivation matters.

Two different people can put their hands or bodies to a flame and depending on their motivation for doing so, the outcome could either be tragic, heroic, or, as DMR says, warranted.

I think making analogies on the act itself is misguided. The analogies should be made in conjunction with the motivation behind the act. If he was attempting to land on an island where you know the inhabitants will kill you, but the reason was because his boat had sunk miles away and he had to swim to the nearest shoreline for help and had to take that chance, I doubt we'd be saying his death was warranted or deserved but rather, tragic.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hector the Pup
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 35946
Location: L.A.

PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2018 8:44 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
I wouldn't agree that a person deserves their fate because they took a stupid life risking stunt. It all depends on the motivation for taking on that stunt. The motivation matters.

Two different people can put their hands or bodies to a flame and depending on their motivation for doing so, the outcome could either be tragic, heroic, or, as DMR says, warranted.

I think making analogies on the act itself is misguided. The analogies should be made in conjunction with the motivation behind the act. If he was attempting to land on an island where you know the inhabitants will kill you, but the reason was because his boat had sunk miles away and he had to swim to the nearest shoreline for help and had to take that chance, I doubt we'd be saying his death was warranted or deserved but rather, tragic.


I'm sure that would be the case, but in this case, his motivation was pure arrogance. I guess some valleys of the shadow of death are off limits even to certain higher powers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2018 9:01 am    Post subject:

Hector the Pup wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
I wouldn't agree that a person deserves their fate because they took a stupid life risking stunt. It all depends on the motivation for taking on that stunt. The motivation matters.

Two different people can put their hands or bodies to a flame and depending on their motivation for doing so, the outcome could either be tragic, heroic, or, as DMR says, warranted.

I think making analogies on the act itself is misguided. The analogies should be made in conjunction with the motivation behind the act. If he was attempting to land on an island where you know the inhabitants will kill you, but the reason was because his boat had sunk miles away and he had to swim to the nearest shoreline for help and had to take that chance, I doubt we'd be saying his death was warranted or deserved but rather, tragic.


I'm sure that would be the case, but in this case, his motivation was pure arrogance. I guess some valleys of the shadow of death are off limits even to certain higher powers.


To me it was more ignorance than arrogance. I'm not clear on why there is a desire to castigate this guy.

He wasn't going for malicious reasons, though, he was certainly misguided.

Why do you say it is arrogance versus say, ignorance?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hector the Pup
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 35946
Location: L.A.

PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2018 9:12 am    Post subject:

Everyone knew to stay off the island. Everyone knew the people wanted to be left alone and, in fact, needed to be left alone.

However, this one missionary felt he was the guy who could change them. He was the one who could walk amongst them.

To me, that is arrogance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52624
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2018 9:22 am    Post subject:

Hector the Pup wrote:
Everyone knew to stay off the island. Everyone knew the people wanted to be left alone and, in fact, needed to be left alone.

However, this one missionary felt he was the guy who could change them. He was the one who could walk amongst them.

To me, that is arrogance.


Because it is the very definition of arrogance.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2018 9:42 am    Post subject:

Hector the Pup wrote:
Everyone knew to stay off the island. Everyone knew the people wanted to be left alone and, in fact, needed to be left alone.

However, this one missionary felt he was the guy who could change them. He was the one who could walk amongst them.

To me, that is arrogance.


Ok. I mean, I just don't understand the need to specifically point that out.

Are those who come here illegally, who know they are not supposed to come here in the method that they did, that know that if discovered they could be deported, are they arrogant?

I suppose by your definition, they are, but, I just don't see the point in specifically calling that out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hector the Pup
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 35946
Location: L.A.

PostPosted: Thu Nov 29, 2018 9:58 am    Post subject:

If you're trying to draw a comparison between that island and the US, you're so far off that it's actually disturbing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 6 of 9
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB