Straight out of GOP.gov a new action movie!

[Xavier]

suicide bombing is really no different then school shootings.

People under heavy duress/injustice lashing out. Why is that so hard to understand?

Ok. But even if you assume that suicide bombers and school shootings are a response to the same social pressures (I disagree, but still), how does that make them a "valid" response?

People still get shocked and outraged at school shootings. If it was a valid response, would it really shock people?

People do a lot of things that are incomprehensible to others, for example, in nazi death camps. The soldiers would herd people into barns to gun them down/burn them. Now what was incomprehensible to me is why the victims didn't resist, they just filed into rank and followed the soldiers to die. I mean, if you are gonna die ANYWAY, why not at least put up some resistance, you know?

But that's not the case, apparently I'd do the same thing in that situation. I'd file rank and wait to be shot. So it seems to be a valid human response. Or should I say a natural human response? Sound better?

I didn't say suicide bombing was incomprehensible.

As for your example, people were faced with a choice. Run from the line and you were guaranteed to be shot down on the spot, or stay in line, and hope that somehow something would happen to spare them. I don't however, see how that really helps the argument that suicide bombing is a "valid" response to circumstances. Its certainly a response though.

[guartz]

People do a lot of things that are incomprehensible to others, for example, in nazi death camps. The soldiers would herd people into barns to gun them down/burn them. Now what was incomprehensible to me is why the victims didn't resist, they just filed into rank and followed the soldiers to die. I mean, if you are gonna die ANYWAY, why not at least put up some resistance, you know?

But that's not the case, apparently I'd do the same thing in that situation. I'd file rank and wait to be shot. So it seems to be a valid human response. Or should I say a natural human response? Sound better?

You are a terribly uninformed and unintelligent fellow. I am sorry that you have evidently received positive reinforcement in the past for your monumental ignorance, as it has led you to continue to speak when you most certainly should not.

I was actually borrowing that idea from Frankl's man search for meaning. Now granted existentialists are not the smartest people in the world, but wow, monumental ignorance?

I wonder though, does your wit end at hurling insults?

[guartz]

I didn't say suicide bombing was incomprehensible.

As for your example, people were faced with a choice. Run from the line and you were guaranteed to be shot down on the spot, or stay in line, and hope that somehow something would happen to spare them. I don't however, see how that really helps the argument that suicide bombing is a "valid" response to circumstances. Its certainly a response though.

Much like your mind protects you by infusing you with denial of your inevitable death, people who are exposed to environments like Palestinians, tend to be suicidal and violent.

I guess the only way to really understand it, is to live it.

[Aerin]

People do a lot of things that are incomprehensible to others, for example, in nazi death camps. The soldiers would herd people into barns to gun them down/burn them. Now what was incomprehensible to me is why the victims didn't resist, they just filed into rank and followed the soldiers to die. I mean, if you are gonna die ANYWAY, why not at least put up some resistance, you know?

But that's not the case, apparently I'd do the same thing in that situation. I'd file rank and wait to be shot. So it seems to be a valid human response. Or should I say a natural human response? Sound better?

You are a terribly uninformed and unintelligent fellow. I am sorry that you have evidently received positive reinforcement in the past for your monumental ignorance, as it has led you to continue to speak when you most certainly should not.

lmao so true. And yes changing "valid" to "normal" does change what was being said, and I hope to God that you can see why.

[guartz]

Look, there have been numerous public studies regarding suicide bombers. The only ones who concur that suicide bombers are the results of indoctrinations come incidentally from Israel. Everyone else says these individuals suffer from acute stress, or what is it called, post traumatic stress disorder from childhood without any treatment.

I think it's a two part problem. Of course, the only ones who would blow themselves up are the crazies who have the problems you mentioned. However, they get the idea to blow themselves up from the indoctrination.

Notice that most people in the US, for example, who commit violent acts that are stressed out and a little unstable tend not to blow themselves up. They use guns, bricks, baseball bats, fists or whatever happens to be on hand at the time they snap. Even the ones that do blow things up try not to blow themselves up in the process.

On the other hand, those who actually intend to blow themselves up only do so because they were told to or otherwise made to believe it was the best choice. Naturally, those who do it have snapped and are unstable, but the notion to bomb oneself is not a natural intuitive instinct like grabbing a brick and bashing someone's head in. Someone made them believe it was the right thing to do, or that their sacrifice would bring about a change that's worth their life.

Sure. As long as you understand that indoctrination alone won't cause you to be suicidal. The will, as they say,(the terrorists) is already there.

[isladar]

I was actually borrowing that idea from Frankl's man search for meaning. Now granted existentialists are not the smartest people in the world, but wow, monumental ignorance?

I wonder though, does your wit end at hurling insults?

I'm reminded of taking a course on US History. During a lecture about the Holocaust at which my father was a guest speaker, a fellow student stated that if she had been a German citizen during the war, she would have done something to stop what was happening in the death camps. My father replied, "I find people are must assured and authoritative in what they would do when they will never, ever have to do it."

So yes, I will say that you are ignorant, because you are speaking of things that you personally know nothing of.

[guartz]

lmao so true. And yes changing "valid" to "normal" does change what was being said, and I hope to God that you can see why.

I used valid from a psychological stand point, not a moral or social standpoint. (Which are, by the way, subjective in this case.)

[Aerin]

lmao so true. And yes changing "valid" to "normal" does change what was being said, and I hope to God that you can see why.

I used valid from a psychological stand point, not a moral or social standpoint. (Which are, by the way, subjective in this case.)

Which you weren't able to explain until the dictionary was thrown in your face.

[Charla]

Or maybe he just didn't bother to explain it because he expected us all to be using a strictly psychological definition of the word, and not apply any of our nasty subjective social or moral interpretations.

[guartz]

I was actually borrowing that idea from Frankl's man search for meaning. Now granted existentialists are not the smartest people in the world, but wow, monumental ignorance?

I wonder though, does your wit end at hurling insults?

I'm reminded of taking a course on US History. During a lecture about the Holocaust at which my father was a guest speaker, a fellow student stated that if she had been a German citizen during the war, she would have done something to stop what was happening in the death camps. My father replied, "I find people are must assured and authoritative in what they would do when they will never, ever have to do it."

So yes, I will say that you are ignorant, because you are speaking of things that you personally know nothing of.

How inappropriately irrelevant. Nevermind the fact that I told you I got my idea from Victor e Frankl, who lived through the concentration camps AND was a certified psychologists.

But tell me, how are you relating what I said to that garbled anecdote you just recited?

[Kuya]

suicide bombing is really no different then school shootings.

People under heavy duress/injustice lashing out. Why is that so hard to understand?

Ok. But even if you assume that suicide bombers and school shootings are a response to the same social pressures (I disagree, but still), how does that make them a "valid" response?

People still get shocked and outraged at school shootings. If it was a valid response, would it really shock people?

People do a lot of things that are incomprehensible to others, for example, in nazi death camps. The soldiers would herd people into barns to gun them down/burn them. Now what was incomprehensible to me is why the victims didn't resist, they just filed into rank and followed the soldiers to die. I mean, if you are gonna die ANYWAY, why not at least put up some resistance, you know?

But that's not the case, apparently I'd do the same thing in that situation. I'd file rank and wait to be shot. So it seems to be a valid human response. Or should I say a natural human response? Sound better?

Mind explaining the point of what you were trying to convey with the bolded? I'd like to know the main idea of it before i cut you down for being ferociously ignorant. And second, you mention that:

The only ones who concur that suicide bombers are the results of indoctrinations come incidentally from Israel.

Yet you post an article arguing the opposite coming from a palestenian. Please do tell me what drove you to believe that the same "incidence" did not apply both ways. And finaly the whole idea of always trying to justify any "abnormal" behaviour as some sort of pathology is a more dangerous argument than i'd bet you'd want to place your bets on.

[Groovebox]

I was actually borrowing that idea from Frankl's man search for meaning. Now granted existentialists are not the smartest people in the world, but wow, monumental ignorance?

I wonder though, does your wit end at hurling insults?

I'm reminded of taking a course on US History. During a lecture about the Holocaust at which my father was a guest speaker, a fellow student stated that if she had been a German citizen during the war, she would have done something to stop what was happening in the death camps. My father replied, "I find people are must assured and authoritative in what they would do when they will never, ever have to do it."

So yes, I will say that you are ignorant, because you are speaking of things that you personally know nothing of.

Your dad sounds like a fucking douchebag.

[guartz]

Or maybe he just didn't bother to explain it because he expected us all to be using a strictly psychological definition of the word, and not apply any of our nasty subjective social or moral interpretations.

That's right, because it wouldn't make sense otherwise, now, would it?

[Kuya]

I was actually borrowing that idea from Frankl's man search for meaning. Now granted existentialists are not the smartest people in the world, but wow, monumental ignorance?

I wonder though, does your wit end at hurling insults?

I'm reminded of taking a course on US History. During a lecture about the Holocaust at which my father was a guest speaker, a fellow student stated that if she had been a German citizen during the war, she would have done something to stop what was happening in the death camps. My father replied, "I find people are must assured and authoritative in what they would do when they will never, ever have to do it."

So yes, I will say that you are ignorant, because you are speaking of things that you personally know nothing of.

Your dad sounds like a fucking douchebag.

Explain yourself, because what isladar said was absolutly true.

[Aerin]

I was actually borrowing that idea from Frankl's man search for meaning. Now granted existentialists are not the smartest people in the world, but wow, monumental ignorance?

I wonder though, does your wit end at hurling insults?

I'm reminded of taking a course on US History. During a lecture about the Holocaust at which my father was a guest speaker, a fellow student stated that if she had been a German citizen during the war, she would have done something to stop what was happening in the death camps. My father replied, "I find people are must assured and authoritative in what they would do when they will never, ever have to do it."

So yes, I will say that you are ignorant, because you are speaking of things that you personally know nothing of.

How inappropriately irrelevant. Nevermind the fact that I told you I got my idea from Victor e Frankl, who lived through the concentration camps AND was a certified psychologists.

But tell me, how are you relating what I said to that garbled anecdote you just recited?

I guess the only way to really understand it, is to live it.

[isladar]

But tell me, how are you relating what I said to that garbled anecdote you just recited?

Now what was incomprehensible to me is why the victims didn't resist, they just filed into rank and followed the soldiers to die. I mean, if you are gonna die ANYWAY, why not at least put up some resistance, you know?

But that's not the case, apparently I'd do the same thing in that situation. I'd file rank and wait to be shot.

I find people are must assured and authoritative in what they would do when they will never, ever have to do it.

I'm always rather resistant to the idea of 'bandwagon' hating people, but it seems 9/10 BG dentists can't be wrong.

[Charla]

Or maybe he just didn't bother to explain it because he expected us all to be using a strictly psychological definition of the word, and not apply any of our nasty subjective social or moral interpretations.

That's right, because it wouldn't make sense otherwise, now, would it?

It would make sense if we thought you really believed that suicide bombing was "valid" under any of the definitions in that dictionary entry. Even though that would be a ridiculous assertion, it's easier to believe that the other guy is saying something ridiculous than to think of how he might be misusing a word in a way that would make it rational.

[guartz]

Mind explaining the point of what you were trying to convey with the bolded? I'd like to know the main idea of it before i cut you down for being ferociously ignorant. And second, you mention that:

Yet you post an article arguing the opposite coming from a palestenian. Please do tell me what drove you to believe that the same "incidence" did not apply both ways. And finaly the whole idea of always trying to justify any "abnormal" behaviour as some sort of pathology is a more dangerous argument than i'd bet you'd want to place your bets on.

Good catch Kuya. I figured that irony wouldn't catch on. To be honest, the only professionals from israel who are googlable and disagree or have a different assessment are not psychologists at all. Social Scientists, PR representatives. etc Besides, whom better to trust then doctors from point of origin anyway?! RIGHT? lol.

Secondly, that was an example (according to Frankl) of human denial. I went into more detail on that in this thread, so you can look a few posts back.

[guartz]

But tell me, how are you relating what I said to that garbled anecdote you just recited?

Now what was incomprehensible to me is why the victims didn't resist, they just filed into rank and followed the soldiers to die. I mean, if you are gonna die ANYWAY, why not at least put up some resistance, you know?

But that's not the case, apparently I'd do the same thing in that situation. I'd file rank and wait to be shot.

I find people are must assured and authoritative in what they would do when they will never, ever have to do it.

I'm always rather resistant to the idea of 'bandwagon' hating people, but it seems 9/10 BG dentists can't be wrong.

See your argument WOULD make sense if I said that I wouldn't just sit back and get shot. Which is understandable why you make that confusion, you probably didn't follow my original posts and just jumped in the middle. But since logic is failing you, let me assure you that I'm not vehemently thumping my chest and claiming that I would have killed Hitler! Since it's in no way relevant to what I was/am discussing.

[aceofspades]

I find people are must assured and authoritative in what they would do when they will never, ever have to do it.

you said what you would do in a situation, one you would never ever be in, sooooooooooooo the quote is perfectly relevant. the quote doesnt specify whether it would be something courageous or even whether it would be you acting like a bitch.