| Welcome to Exit Mundi Forums. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Lie | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 20 2007, 02:58 PM (1,392 Views) | |
| Katastrof | Jan 30 2007, 02:03 PM Post #46 |
|
One Of The Four Horseman
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Support claims? Is that just another phrase for "giving up"? |
![]() "Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero"(Seize the day put no trust in tomorrow) ~ Horace | |
![]() |
|
| That guy on the forum | Jan 30 2007, 03:17 PM Post #47 |
![]()
Planning World Domination
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Take this argument quote pyramid somewhere else. This is for philosophy, not politics. |
![]() |
|
| Falcon | Jan 30 2007, 11:05 PM Post #48 |
|
Apocalyptic Usher
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
What's the point of arguing a philosophy based on pure theory when we have examples of the philosophy working in the real world where its results can be analyzed objectively? I don't think, in such a case, it is inappropriate to ask that arguments based on applied philosophies be supported with some evidence. |
![]() |
|
| That guy on the forum | Jan 31 2007, 12:01 AM Post #49 |
![]()
Planning World Domination
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm not trying to say we shouldn't argue about the philosophy, just tone it down. |
![]() |
|
| 严加华 | Jan 31 2007, 04:24 AM Post #50 |
|
Magister Ludicrous
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Your point being.... what? It was a half-baked social plan that resulted in mass death. Like every other half-baked social plan throughout all of fucking Chinese history. The only difference was the scale and the scale was the result of superior technology enabling such a scale of death and misery..
My idea of "the same" is "cock-eyed leadership completely devoid of common sense goes out and fucks things up in the name of some bizarre ideology consisting mainly of repudiating the previous rules and causes wide-spread misery". The cycles of Chinese history are so monotonously regular that I can give you within about 20 years the date when this government will fall and be replaced. Qin pulled together something that wasn't really a country into a nation, then fell rapidly and gave rise to Han. Han lasted a long time, then fell and led to fractious warring until put together by the Sui. The Sui, like the Qin, was short-lived and fell to the Tang, who lasted a long time. And fell, causing another cycle of warring until pulled out of it by the Yuan (foreign rule). The Yuan lasted a short time and were followed by the Ming (and by the foreign Qing) for long periods of stability. So what's next? I'll give you a hint: Taiping, civil war, Republic, foreign invasion, People's Republic. The People's Republic is just the "Mao Dynasty" -- the post-strife Dynasty that pulls the country back together after periods of chaos and then falls rapidly. And just like the Qin introduced major social changes (imperial system), so too did the Sui (land equalisation -- *gasp* to reduce the gap between rich and poor, no less!), the Yuan (famine-fighting measures, diversity measures) and now the People's Republic ("socialism with Chinese characteristics" to quote Deng Xiaoping to the eternal amusement of expats). Now the last round of chaos was much quicker than were the periods of antiquity, but again this is the accelleration borne of improved technology and organisational skills. So instead of having two-plus centuries of chaos before being pulled out of it, there was instead about 50 years of it. This also means that the People's Republic will likely fall proportionately more quickly. My prediction is for it to fall in another 50-70 years. To be replaced, again, by a more civilised and longer-lasting "Dynasty". And, at last, I figured out what your problem is. You are utterly incapable of abstraction. You cannot see parallels in history (in both this case and in military tactics and strategy) because you're so focused on the details you're not seeing the overarching theme or possibly not even capable of seeing same. Which is why literalist Christianity appeals to you so much. It's all you can understand. |
LC Sez:
| |
![]() |
|
| Falcon | Jan 31 2007, 04:39 AM Post #51 |
|
Apocalyptic Usher
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Oh no, I pay attention to the details and facts instead of obcessing over generalizations too broad to have any useful meaning. Don't get me wrong though, I can and do deal with abstractions when they're useful, but this isn't one of those cases. You know you're too abstract when all of history is whittled down to revolving cycles. Its true, broadly, but it isn't helpful to understanding where we are now in relation to where we once were. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Philosophy and Ethics · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z2.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)







8:13 AM Jul 11