A Starbucks Quote...

page 1 of 2 1 2 Next » 34 total items

SilentMasamune

SilentMasamune

I'm all washed up. . .

Cancel

I thank everyone for the birthday wishes yesterday, and I hope I've done my best to repay all the wishes. :D Today, I bring to you a new type of topic for the forum, and the topic type is argument. It's from my Introduction to Logic class. Here's the quote, which could be found on Starbucks Cups, Quote #22.

The Way I See It - Jonah Goldberg

"Everywhere, unthinking mobs of 'independent thinkers' wield tired cliches like cudgels, pummeling those who dare to question 'enlightened' dogma. If 'violence never solved anything', cops wouldn't have guns and slaves may have never been freed. If it's better that 10 guilty men go free to spare one innocent, why not free 100 or 1,000,000? Cliches begun arguments, they don't settle them."

-- Jonah Goldberg, Editor-at-large of National Review Online

What do you think about the quote? Do you think the author is correct? Do you think that you can prove something over the author? Oh, and be warned that topics with arguments are much more difficult to deal with than those...common...topics.

Signature Image
Support Limerock Cafe - full feature forum and gallery

  • Aug 31, 2005

animefreak3

animefreak3

Serpentarius

Cancel

The best way to see things is not are they right, but what is right. I see lots that is right, and parts that I disagree with.

We begin and end in nothingness. Our darkness is confronting our ultimate nature, for nothing can come from nothing. We must sow the wind and reap the void, since the now is all we have. Together, we walk in darkness.

  • Aug 31, 2005

lunacrystal

lunacrystal

Am I alive?

Cancel

O.o i dont get it. im only 12 so dont pick on me! >.<

This signature violates the signature guidelines, thus it has been removed.

  • Aug 31, 2005

animefreak3

animefreak3

Serpentarius

Cancel

vietgurl5593,

We won't, MT is full of nice people. You might even get questions answered if you ask them?

We begin and end in nothingness. Our darkness is confronting our ultimate nature, for nothing can come from nothing. We must sow the wind and reap the void, since the now is all we have. Together, we walk in darkness.

  • Aug 31, 2005

PhoenixNox

PhoenixNox

Psychotic Ender

Cancel

Jesus Christ you sound like my English teacher.

Anyway, i think he makes a good point, and a powerful one too, especially the 'violence never solved anything' part.

r e v o l u t i o n | c o n v o l u t i o n | e x s p e c t a t i o n | d e s p e r a t i o n
Signature
	Image
Halo-2|TheGrungeFamily|doujin-arena|doujinshi-support-club|death-note|TheBattleRoom

SilentMasamune

SilentMasamune

I'm all washed up. . .

Cancel

Okay, I'll initiate the argument...

I feel that those people who use violence as a means of establishing peace are wrong, simply because violence is redundant. It seems that everywhere people go, violence is used to stop another violence, such as with guns or swords. But the means of stopping violence seems to be provoking it even more than it used to in the past. Take Martin Luther King's means of protest; he fought using no violence whatsoever, and in the end, his idea of ending segregation was victorious though he lost his life. People today seem to rely on violence to solve their problems when, in turn, they'll never be solved because they still need to find out the real reason why the problem started. Killing anyone won't solve anyone's problems.

Signature Image
Support Limerock Cafe - full feature forum and gallery

  • Aug 31, 2005

animefreak3

animefreak3

Serpentarius

Cancel

Violence has many shades. A line from MSI, "When you're out gay bashing, I'm gonna be at home f*ckin your gf. In the *ss." Note: He's a rockstar. I'm sure anybody's gf wouldn't care if he wanted to get on it. That was not the violence. The violence was pointing out where the guy should be instead of calling someone a fag*t. Violence != killing.

We begin and end in nothingness. Our darkness is confronting our ultimate nature, for nothing can come from nothing. We must sow the wind and reap the void, since the now is all we have. Together, we walk in darkness.

  • Aug 31, 2005

Inuyasha-FAN

Inuyasha-FAN

I'm back

Cancel

Quote by vietgurl5593O.o i dont get it. im only 12 so dont pick on me! &gt;.&lt;

yep i dont ether!! and im 12 too

  • Aug 31, 2005

RainOfStars

RainOfStars

Elusive Dream

Cancel

Well, what you are saying could be true, but not in our present world.

Human race isn't evolve enough to think of the bigger picture. We are too focus on ourselves. That creates greed and so on. People will only do the right thing if there is a motivation, and often violence is the answer. Without violence, there won't be any order or peace in society.

Signature
	Image

SilentMasamune

SilentMasamune

I'm all washed up. . .

Cancel

Quote by RainOfStarsHuman race isn't evolve enough to think of the bigger picture. We are too focus on ourselves. That creates greed and so on. People will only do the right thing if there is a motivation, and often violence is the answer. Without violence, there won't be any order or peace in society.

I disagree to an extent. In the past, violence seemed to have solved more of the conflict that was persistent. In World War 2, the war ended when Adolf Hitler was killed. That's because people knew the source of their problems. When Hitler was killed, the war ended, and peace was established. Nowadays, we're really fighting in circles because there seems to be no point as to why the fights start. With the exception of the War on Terror, which began due to the attacks in the US on September 11th, most other fighting is pointless. And, because the War on Terror seems to be going on and on, it's beginning to seem pointless too. Why is a 3 to 4 year war still persisting if nothing much is going on to help put an end to it? It's because people are so intent on showing others who should dominate and whose ways are best, when in turn there is no definite establishment of a law; people would do anything to prove others wrong, especially in the violent means, without thinking everything through and seeing what works and what doesn't.

Signature Image
Support Limerock Cafe - full feature forum and gallery

  • Sep 01, 2005

PwnOXz0r

PwnOXz0r

The One

Cancel

Yes. I can. I think that author is a stupid, jacked-up emo kid. He thinks the wrold is nothing but violence. Here's a quote to the author from someone we all know.

Quote by The Coolest Guy In the Whole World, Ruler of All Which PwnzNot everything is 'red', idiot. If you think so then I will show you color. I will give to you green and you shall see green. I shall give you yellow and you will see yellow. So far what I have said means "Not everything is violence. Our world is full of surprises. To make peace, someone must give up their peace. To make anything first something must be gathered and used. If you refuse 'color' then you sir are incompetant.

How's that float your boat?

Join us. There is no option but Green.
Be bold, think Green www.limerockcafe.net

Limerockcafe.net

  • Sep 01, 2005

wolfco

wolfco

Prelate

Cancel

*sword out*

Ok, I'll play the game for a little while. I do agree in part with the quote. I think that people argue using their own indoctrinated beliefs as opposed to their own actual beliefs. Have you read "A Brave New World?" It is a rather lack-luster book that was on the required reading list of one of my high school English classes. I don't think it is a particularly good book, but I do think it is an excellent extension of this particular sydrome. If you are not familar with the book, it takes place in a future where people are created to fulfill specific roles in life via test-tubes. These infants are then intentionally brainwashed to be happy in their roles. They have the answers to all their questions pre-programmed into their brains and just spout whatever quote is appropriate to the situation.

*raises sword*

Now as to whether "violence" is necessary, useful, or valuable. I think that violence as a general rule spawns more violence; however, I don't necessarily see that as bad. I think that when a concept or idea becomes generally acceptable it is exceedingly difficult to go back and remove or edit it. I think that violence is sometimes the only way to create a space for change. I do not so much approve of it as understand its uses. Lets look at an example.. Slavery...

Ok, first we have to define it. Slavery is a system of controlling a person or persons to benefit oneself or one's culture without allowing them certain specific freedoms. Ok, next is slavery ever acceptable? If the answer is no, then why are there still "slaves." If the answer is yes, then who should be enslaved?

The historical (written) and archeological (other) evidence seems to suggest that the vast majority of the world's cultures approved of slavery at one time. How long did slavery in one form or another exist? Most of human history includes slavery. Without the violence acted out on slaves the slaves would not have rebelled and in rebelling proved their ability to free themselves. Violence in concepts and beliefs created slavery, but it also assisted in its end. Violence is an unescapable aspect of humanity. It is an out-growth of our need to protect ourselves and our love-ones or posessions. I don't think it is sensible to determinedly disapprove of it. I think the trick to stopping a negative progression is to recognize it and use your intellect to aim it down an appropriate path. You can use it if you understand what it is. It does not have to be war.

If you would challenge me, then you must first stand before the Darkness. You must look into it and become it. You must fall before it and then reach out to encompass it. When it is joined to your heart, you must overcome its insidious temptation. You are ready to face me when you can betray even your own heart in service to your cause.
____________________________________________________________________________

  • Sep 01, 2005
Cancel

Total invasion. A collective. Sentinel machines to do the dirty work...and a mothership, with a doomsday (thalaron) feature: a Cascading Biogenic Pulse, followed by a tachyon emissions and residual antiprotons, to lengthen thalaron's radiant intensity; this allows the thalaron...to encompass on a planetary scale...also, thalaron radiation allows this energy to expand almost without limit. The thalaron agent...will break down organic, biological and solid components...at the subatomic level...
Problem solved...conquest. And hey...no bloodshed; just shattering into rock fragments and powder.

  • Sep 01, 2005
Cancel

violence may not always be the best option.. but that doesn't mean it doesn't work. If the person doing the violence thinks morality is on their side, they'd probably use it to their advantage.

  • Sep 01, 2005

inuyashalove04

inuyashalove04

inuai-chan

Cancel

I don't know...this topic can go in many directions. It's true that violence doesn't solve everything, but it can solve certain problems. But...it just depends on the means of using the violence. It doesn't matter who can or can't use violence as a 'weapon', because sooner or later...someone will use it...badly I guess. Just a random thought.
Also, I didn't know about your birthday. Sorry... happy belated birthday.
Bye.

Signature Image
"I personally believe that each of us was put here for a purpose-- to build not to destroy. If I can make people smile, then I have served my purpose for God." - Red Skelton

RainOfStars

RainOfStars

Elusive Dream

Cancel

Quote by SilentMasamune

Quote by RainOfStarsHuman race isn't evolve enough to think of the bigger picture. We are too focus on ourselves. That creates greed and so on. People will only do the right thing if there is a motivation, and often violence is the answer. Without violence, there won't be any order or peace in society.

I disagree to an extent. In the past, violence seemed to have solved more of the conflict that was persistent. In World War 2, the war ended when Adolf Hitler was killed. That's because people knew the source of their problems. When Hitler was killed, the war ended, and peace was established. Nowadays, we're really fighting in circles because there seems to be no point as to why the fights start. With the exception of the War on Terror, which began due to the attacks in the US on September 11th, most other fighting is pointless. And, because the War on Terror seems to be going on and on, it's beginning to seem pointless too. Why is a 3 to 4 year war still persisting if nothing much is going on to help put an end to it? It's because people are so intent on showing others who should dominate and whose ways are best, when in turn there is no definite establishment of a law; people would do anything to prove others wrong, especially in the violent means, without thinking everything through and seeing what works and what doesn't.


I am not saying I agree with wars. i think they are just ways for a country to take control of another. The "war on terror" is just a sad attampt of US trying to make their war legitimate. Have anyone actually thought why people are attacking US? Anyway, getting back to the topic. Even though it is not the best solution, violence is the easiest and fastest way to take control of a situation. As a race, we don't have the ability to work towards the common interest or the greater good. We can try reasoning with other people, but most of the time it won't result in anything. I am not saying any side is right to use violence. However, it is the only way to make others do what you want.

The war on terror is endless only because the people there are against the US. Unless, they kill everyone who lives in Iraq. The war will never end.

Signature
	Image

s9031496c

s9031496c

.:. NAMIE .:.

Cancel

ahhh? I don't get what ya sayin....

Thanx endoftheworld for the sig^_^
Signature
	Image
You can call me Namie or Batrisha. May God Bless ya always!

fooblued

fooblued

British Fetishist

Cancel

The really funny thing is, reading the wording of the quote he sounds like one of the people he is complaining about :), going around and complaining a lot with out offeringways to solve things. Myself, I never think that I know better than anyone else, except when it come to myself. The only thing I am certain of, is what is right for myself.

This signature violates the signature guidelines, thus it has been removed.

FredGreg

FredGreg

Cynical pedant.

Cancel

Quote by RainOfStarsHave anyone actually thought why people are attacking US?

[...]

The war on terror is endless only because the people there are against the US. Unless, they kill everyone who lives in Iraq. The war will never end.

This could be contrued as a flame, but basically I believe the reason people are attacking the US & the west in general is that they want to live in their tribal, male-dominated, violent society as they have done for many years. The liberty (that was) so pervasive in the west, & especially in the US, is a direct affront to that, & in this age of globalisation in terms economic & otherwise, the west has a huge influence on them. Look at Afghanistan 30 years ago - one of the most progressive, egalitarian nations in the world, until Russia had a war there & in the aftermath the Taliban took over. It's nota conflict of religion or a case of nutcases hating for no reason - it's a clash of ideologies, equality & liberty vs. 14th century tribalism.

And the war on terror is endless because you can't beat it. It's not a nation or a defined organisation. It's not even an idea, a way of life or an ideology. It's a method. You cannot defeat a method. You can try to stop people using it, but the 'War on Terror' (that's a misnomer - you can't go to war unless you have two sides; one side is a nebulous, undefined 'enemy,' so 'war' doesn't fit here) is a farce IMHO (where the 'h' stands for 'honest,' not 'humble'). It simply cannot succeed, because they aim to eradicate all terrorism. I can get picky about that too: terrorism is not violence, terrorism is inducing terror to achieve an end or as an end in itself. Not terror as a byproduct, it has to be a specific goal. Today's buzz about terrorism seems to only consider violent terrorism, not economic, social or other forms.

Now the original question: I tend to agree that 'independent thinkers' are often highly conformant to a rebellious school of thought. However, I would think true free thinkers are those who consider every topic on it's own merits, rather that choosing a 'side' & sticking to it for everything (see politics: you have to choose one party or candidate & take everything they say or nothing they say - more illustrative would be the left- vs. right-wing debates). By this definition I count myself one, so I'm a bit biased here, but still.

If a cliche settles an argument, you have something to worry about. It means you don't really care, if you give in to a cliche. On the other hand, cliches giving rise to arguments is both predictable & favourable. It means you're thinking still, in that you choose to disagree.

  • Sep 01, 2005

FFTacticsX

FFTacticsX

xX Execute Order 66 Xx

Cancel

People fighting each other because of the ego,thirst for power and every thing must be done by thier ways...
thats leads to arguments and then its getting worse....

This signature was longer than 4 lines and has been removed.

  • Sep 01, 2005

Akaiken

Akaiken

Ike, Fin Funnel!

Cancel

Geez... Logic Class again?

The way I see it, violence is, I think, one thing people exist. And the author made a good point at what he said.

Geez... crazy again...

Signature
	Image
Unit No. - RX-93
Unit Name - Nu Gundam

cardmage

cardmage

After you

Cancel

Violence, like everything else everyone does, can be seen as a means to and ends. My definition of violence would be "an act of force that would cause harm to others". This would of course be much wider than the common idea of violence as physical violence. The problem with violence is that it usually does far more damage then it does good if we look at the entire thing. Is there no other way to solve a problem except violence? The answer is often that an alternative can be found.

Besides this, violence only gives rise to more violence. Somewhere, someone must stop it and say "lets end this violence". In war, we call the party who decides to end it the loser as they would have surrendered. Did the other party really win though? Are the things they gained justifiable from the things they have lost? Life is after all beyond any pricing and the accelerated loss of life is an undeniable consequence of war and its violence.

And violence only gives rise to more violence, not an end to violence. It is not violence that causes an end but enlightenment or tolerance. Only when one realizes that violence in such a case is a mistake that they'll stop the violence.

And we'll talk about slavery since the author quoted it. How did the first slave come to be? I'm not entirely sure, but I am pretty sure that violence was a part of the process. In effect, from my definition, we can already say slavery is a "violent" act since it causes harms to the slaves in that it deprives them of their freedom. So we can say that violence caused the problem in the first place. From everything said here, violence eventually solved this problem and let slaves be freed.

However, would this be entirely true? If the owners of the freed slaves thought of the violence against them as wrong and of the ownership of slaves to be right, would they continue their violence against the slaves and force them into slavery all over again? The answer would no doubt be yes. Its the awakening of society to "slavery" as something wrong that stopped it from happening again. Again it is true that violence in this case achieved this end, but if violence didn't exist in the first place then would slavery come into existence? My guess is that it would be rather doubtful.

Violence then, would often be the means to solve problems that are in itself violent in nature. Violence, people argue, is a part of human nature and preparing for violence against acts of violence would then be a wise thing. However, if violence didn't exist in the first place then there would also be no need of it. In short, I'm entirely against violence.

Life is tranquil, Death is peaceful...
Signature
	Image
Its the transition that is troublesome...

  • Sep 01, 2005

RainOfStars

RainOfStars

Elusive Dream

Cancel

Quote by FredGregThis could be contrued as a flame, but basically I believe the reason people are attacking the US &amp; the west in general is that they want to live in their tribal, male-dominated, violent society as they have done for many years. The liberty (that was) so pervasive in the west, &amp; especially in the US, is a direct affront to that, &amp; in this age of globalisation in terms economic &amp; otherwise, the west has a huge influence on them. Look at Afghanistan 30 years ago - one of the most progressive, egalitarian nations in the world, until Russia had a war there &amp; in the aftermath the Taliban took over. It's nota conflict of religion or a case of nutcases hating for no reason - it's a clash of ideologies, equality &amp; liberty vs. 14th century tribalism.
And the war on terror is endless because you can't beat it. It's not a nation or a defined organisation. It's not even an idea, a way of life or an ideology. It's a method. You cannot defeat a method. You can try to stop people using it, but the 'War on Terror' (that's a misnomer - you can't go to war unless you have two sides; one side is a nebulous, undefined 'enemy,' so 'war' doesn't fit here) is a farce IMHO (where the 'h' stands for 'honest,' not 'humble'). It simply cannot succeed, because they aim to eradicate all terrorism. I can get picky about that too: terrorism is not violence, terrorism is inducing terror to achieve an end or as an end in itself. Not terror as a byproduct, it has to be a specific goal. Today's buzz about terrorism seems to only consider violent terrorism, not economic, social or other forms.


Well, we are kind of off topic here. Hope SilentMasamune won't mind.
Anyway, I prefere to think it is the US government's own fault for intervien with the middle east. US is always trying to gain control of that place for its oil. Now, it pays for its actions. I agree that terrorism is a way of life. It is a tendency for Muslims (no offense to anyone). It is just the way the religion goes.

Signature
	Image

SilentMasamune

SilentMasamune

I'm all washed up. . .

Cancel

Quote by RainOfStarsThe war on terror is endless only because the people there are against the US. Unless, they kill everyone who lives in Iraq. The war will never end.

I disagree. The war is endless only because people learned that violence will solve their problems, and that on its own is a negative, seeing as how exacting revenge for most people is done by the use of the cliches. It originally should've been a means of trying to stop the provoking of an idea. Where did negotiations go? I hardly see any negotiation to solve a problem between 2 people today; it's all about fighting to see who's laws or beliefs dominate. If the US said that they'll rebuild and perhaps negotiate with the leaders of Iraq, then maybe conflict may have been avoided. However, there are people who would rather see things the hard way and cause more and more conflict and even involve other people in their business rather than settle their differences peacefully.

If everyone in Iraq was killed, that will pose problems for Iraq's allies. Their allies would want to seek some sort of revenge for their loss, am I right? See, people these days don't think as much as they used to back in the past, and that is why there's so much conflict going on, and the use of guns to solve problems today is much more frequently used than in the past. However, there is not a thing that's being solved. The only thing happening is the provoking of more and more violence, and therefore, it has become one of our means of attempting to solve something, as if we've been manipulated by these cliches.

Signature Image
Support Limerock Cafe - full feature forum and gallery

  • Sep 01, 2005

page 1 of 2 1 2 Next » 34 total items

Back to General Discussions | Active Threads | Forum Index

Only members can post replies, please register.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Read more.