rumitoid

Unfreakingbelievable.

rumitoid

Duh! Yes!

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

Go away and annoy someone else. Socrates, you are not! Let's just say I question your sincerity.

If I was a Moral Relativist I would have said we were right and they were wrong.

acknowledgeurma

I didn't know we were in a debate. I was just wondering what it takes to make someone a "pathetic little coward"?

acknowledgeurma

Why would I want to go away?

I don't understand your logic. How is it that a moral relativist would say, "we were right and they were wrong"? Really, I don't understand your logic there. Could you clarify please.

Peewee Loc: San Antonio, TX

You have a brain and enough info, surely you can figure it out without someone helping you.

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

Moral relativism, not amoral relativism. Think about what each word means. They have dictionaries if you have problems understanding.

acknowledgeurma

Sorry, I left out the space between a and m.

This bit of the thread started when I asked kankune,
"Why is [the El Paso shooter] a "pathetic little coward"?"
kankune never answered, but Peewee replied,
"Because he had a gun and killed unarmed innocent people who never harmed him, might be your first clue."
To which I asked,
"So is anyone who kills "unarmed innocent people who never harmed [them]" a "pathetic little coward"?"
Peewee replied,
"Unless it's self-defense or war, I would say yes, size doesn't matter."
I asked, "So no one who kills "unarmed innocent people who never harmed [them]" in war is a "pathetic little coward"?"
You (dtucker300) replied,
"War is self-defense."
I asked,
"So the Germans bombing London was self-defense."
You replied,
"Don't be ridiculous. In their opinion it was."
I asked,
"So are you a moral relativist?"
You replied,
"No. If I was a moral relativist I would have said we were justified and they were not."

You also wrote,
"Go away and annoy someone else. Socrates, you are not! Let's just say I question your sincerity.
If I was a Moral Relativist I would have said we were right and they were wrong."

I asked you to clarify the logic (but I made a typing error: "amoral" instead of "a moral").
Then you wrote,
"Moral relativism, not amoral relativism. Think about what each word means. They have dictionaries if you have problems understanding."

Realizing I was not going to get an answer from you, I found (with some trepidation that I be deemed pedantic):
https://www.iep.utm.edu/moral-re/
Moral relativism is the view that moral judgments are true or false only relative to some particular standpoint (for instance, that of a culture or a historical period) and that no standpoint is uniquely privileged over all others.

Wouldn't a moral relativist say (assuming they even couched things in terms of right and wrong), "We are right and they are right"?

But to get back to my original question to kankune, why is [the El Paso shooter] a "pathetic little coward"?
An answer might have been: "I think pathetic little cowards are the worst people, and the shooter is one of the worst people."
Or, "The shooter is a vulnerable child deserving pity because he lacked the heart to let people he feared live."

Regarding, "Go away and annoy someone else. Socrates, you are not! Let's just say I question your sincerity."
Of course I'm not Socrates. He was (is) the hero of oligarchs. I prefer democracy.
You question my sincerity. Interesting. I don't question your ability to mount ad hominem attacks.

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

There now, you answered your own question. That wasn't so hard, was it.

I don't question my ability to mount ad hominem attacks either. And I refrain from doing so when answers are self-evident. That is until the responder decides to play games. That is why I question your sincerity, based on many of your previous questions and responses to not only myself but also others.

The question was asked and answered. Do you have trouble reading between the lines as well as understanding what is clearly stated? The El Paso shooter was a pathetic little coward, as are most cowards because he targeted people in a gun-free zone where there was virtually no chance of anyone fighting back.

Why don't you tell us what you think a pathetic little coward is, or is not, and stop wasting people's time? You've danced around every topic without ever offering any real information or solutions to about what you think. Then again, maybe no ones care what you think. You've been on this site long enough that I doubt you are a troll. I believe you sincerely think you are adding to the conversation.

So tell us, what is the shooter in El Paso? Is he a pathetic little coward, racist, mentally deranged, a thrill-seeker, race war instigator, misunderstood person suffering from arrested development, sociopath, psychopath, etc., etc.?

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

Black Lives Matter v. FBI statistics

https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipN9s-TGQTqvaDMTa1nU77r_Mned0gE-qKqrLXFOC_h_x8e4DH14bVbmyLXpf3QbKg?key=anI1a2lSaHJkWlloc0UwenExRGEzR21JdEt4N3Bn

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

Oh, Really?

acknowledgeurma

But I didn't answer my own question. You made a statement about what a moral relativist would say. I didn't understand how a moral relativist would come to say that. I requested clarification. (Is a request for clarification a question?) I understood you to imply that I couldn't understand the meanings of the words moral relativist. I thought, maybe you're right; so I googled a definition. That definition led me to a different conclusion for what a moral relativist would say.

You say I've answered my question. Are you thus, admitting to being wrong about what a moral relativist would say? No, of course you will admit no such thing, for you are really only trying to avoid the consequences of running onto this game trail that began with the over broad statement: anyone who kills unarmed innocent people who never harmed them is a pathetic little coward.

You asked me, "Why don't you tell us what you think a pathetic little coward is, or is not, and stop wasting people's time?"
Why don't I tell you? Well no one ever asked before, but since you asked so nicely...
(Oh no, he's released the Pedantosaurus)...

Let us begin:
pathetic: arousing pity, especially through vulnerability or sadness
pity: the feeling of sorrow and compassion caused by the suffering and misfortunes of others
little: small in size, amount, or degree (often used to convey an appealing diminutiveness or express an affectionate or condescending attitude)
coward: a person who lacks the courage to do or endure dangerous or unpleasant things
courage: mental or moral strength to venture, persevere, and withstand danger, fear, or difficulty

Putting it all together, pathetic little coward:
a person (thought of with either affection or condescension) lacking the mental or moral strength to venture, persevere, and withstand danger, fear, or difficulty, whose suffering and misfortunes arouses the feeling of sorrow and compassion

This seems a bit of an oxymoron. Who ever feels compassion for a coward? It could be that the meaning of or attitude toward some of these words has changed. Perhaps some have come to feel sorrow for cowards; perhaps some have come to have contempt for feelings of compassion.

You say, I've danced around every topic without ever offering any real information. And yet you have replied to a post of mine, "Not at all and you make a good point." Were you dissembling?

You say, "You've been on this site long enough that I doubt you are a troll."
Perhaps I am a patient fisher trailing a line into the OPP waters? (OPP can o' bees swamp)

So what is the El Paso shooter? I think it is a difficult thing to kill another person. It goes against most all of our early childhood training. It takes special training to overcome. So did he not get the proper childhood training? Was there something training in his environment that overcame the early training? Maybe he's insane.

dtucker300 Loc: Vista, CA

Alright, we got off to a bad start. Let us clear the air and wipe the slate clean.

I didn't call the shooter a "Pathetic Little Coward." I think it was Kankune who said that. I'm not going to dig through the entire thread to see who said what. I'll take your word for it:
This bit of the thread started when I asked kankune,
"Why is [the El Paso shooter] a "pathetic little coward"?"
kankune never answered, but Peewee replied,
"Because he had a gun and killed unarmed innocent people who never harmed him, might be your first clue."
To which I asked,
"So is anyone who kills "unarmed innocent people who never harmed [them]" a "pathetic little coward"?"
Peewee replied,
"Unless it's self-defense or war, I would say yes, size doesn't matter."
I asked, "So no one who kills "unarmed innocent people who never harmed [them]" in war is a "pathetic little coward"?"
You (dtucker300) replied,
"War is self-defense."
I asked,
"So the Germans bombing London was self-defense."
You replied,
"Don't be ridiculous. In their opinion it was."
I asked,
"So are you a moral relativist?"
You replied,
"No. If I was a moral relativist I would have said we were justified and they were not."


Let's say that the phrase "Pathetic Little Coward" was used as a figure of speech, a hyperbole. But Why?

I would add that he is Pathetic Little Coward because he is a racist. Racism is a mental illness in my opinion. (Another funny thing about "race" is that there is no such thing. Two-hundred years ago some idiot examined skulls from different areas of the world and found the cranial capacity to vary. This implied to him that some had larger brains, and thus were more intelligent, while the smaller skull represented less intelligence. The largest skull came from the Caucasus Mountains and this led to calling white people Caucasian. The whole thing is a discredited idea, not even a theory.)

Racism is also something that is learned. Nevertheless, he let his racism control his actions. Anyone with a rational iota of thought can understand that racism is unjustified, wouldn't you agree? People are blaming Trump for "telling him to kill Mexicans" (I don't remember the exact wording they may have used but the Democratic Presidential Candidates jumped immediately onto the campaign trail to drive that point home. They capitalized on a horrific incident to gain political points). Even assuming the shooter was schizophrenic, hearing voices, or interpreted Trump words as an order to go out and kill these people, he is still insane. There are millions of insane people in this country and they didn't pick up a gun to kill people. And the gun didn't do it by itself.

He is Pathetic because he has lived with this condition and no one recognized that the problems he has are more severe than anyone previously thought. Perhaps, they just didn't care or they were too busy with their own lives to have noticed something was really wrong. I don't think this is so because his own mother asked questions of the local police about his gun purchase and such. But no one raised an alarm. That is pathetic. Also, what he has done to his family is pathetic and something they have to live with, wondering how they missed the signs or perhaps feeling guilty about not getting him the help he needed.
On the one hand, I feel compassion for him, and at the same time contempt for what he has done. All these lives and potential for the future lost. For what? That is textbook pathos.

He killed unarmed men, women, and children, another sign of mental illness. You have to be crazy to unjustly kill another human, wouldn't you agree? No sane person would kill just for the sport of it, be goaded on by fantasy, or told to kill unless they were, at a minimum, sociopathic, or psychopathic.

He is Little because his life is essentially over. He experienced brief adulthood, maybe none at all. He had a little mind. He had no vision for his future other than to do this horrendous thing he did.

He is a Coward most of all because again he targeted Mexicans; unarmed men, women, and children. He chose to travel where he knew he would find an abundance of targets, in a gun-free zone, essentially assured that there would be no one to stop him, fight back, or kill him. He immediately dropped his weapon(s) in order to be apprehended by the police and not shot. He couldn't stand the pain. He was a coward because he was afraid of Mexicans. He was afraid of them coming across the border in large numbers. He drove 900 miles away from his town to do this deed right at the border. If he wasn't a coward, he might have decided to go after the Mexican Federal Police at the border, going up against armed officers with enough training that he surely would have been killed almost immediately, just as the Ohio shooter was.

At this point would you agree that the shooter was a pathetic little coward, as opposed to, say, a Brave Bully?

To be continued if you wish to do so. That's all I can write tonight. It's late.

acknowledgeurma

Very good! This was an excellent explanation of the appropriateness of calling the El Paso shooter a pathetic little coward. You have removed the oxymoron by treating it not as one concept, but three. He is pathetic; he is little; he is a coward. Thank you.

P.S., Brave Bully seems a true oxymoron, immune to your magic.

bahmer

Amen and Amen