HeadingNorth Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 So you are saying that inequality entertains you? People can be equal and at the same time not boring...it just means they're different, we are all different despite the fact that some label. In the strictest terms, being different means not being equal. Different people may be equally valuable, or equally worthy of respect, legal protection, or what-have-you .. but they are, by definition, not equal to each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritPat Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 So you are saying that inequality entertains you? People can be equal and at the same time not boring...it just means they're different, we are all different despite the fact that some label. We are all different and therefore in general unequal ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 We are all different and therefore in general unequal ! You made the point with "Different", why do you think you had to go further with unequal? Or are you saying that the dictionary has at least one to many words? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritPat Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 Do you take the view that a serial child rapist is equal to a law abiding citizen? He's merely asking for the reasons that lead people to decide whether or not he is. Indeed, in terms of physical strength, mental prowess or other non-rape-related issues, he may even be superior. The reason is self evident is it not? The law abiding citizen by definition is not a serial child rapist and therefore is not a clear and present danger to society while the serial child rapist is, any notion of equality which is after all an abstract mathematical concept anyway has disappeared in a cloud of smoke. Your point re possible superiority if considering non rape criteria is of course valid, however, it serves to highlight inevitable inequality and undermines the original argument that appears to take a default position of equality ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 Your point re possible superiority if considering non rape criteria is of course valid, however, it serves to highlight inevitable inequality and undermines the original argument that appears to take a default position of equality ! There is no original argument, only a question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 Do you take the view that a serial child rapist is equal to a law abiding citizen? I would say they are equal...they made a decision which differs from yours, and most which make them are as different from you as you are different from them because you didn't make their decision in life. It doesn't make you any more or less equal. It may make you feel superior, better etc. We like to feel we're superior or better when the term "serial child rapists" is used because it excuses us from our own possibilities. As someone has implied...as humans we are all equal but just different...for better or worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritPat Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 I would say they are equal...they made a decision which differs from yours, and most which make them are as different from you as you are different from them because you didn't make their decision in life. It doesn't make you any more or less equal. It may make you feel superior, better etc. We like to feel we're superior or better when the term "serial child rapists" is used because it excuses us from our own possibilities. As someone has implied...as humans we are all equal but just different...for better or worse. Two people, things, quantities etc cannot be more or less equal (Orwellian Animal Farm references) They either are or are not equal. Stalin and Nelson Mandela, equal or unequal? Ian Brady and Professor Sir Magdi Yacoub, equal or unequal? Myra Hindley and Mother Theresa, equal or unequal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkheart Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 So you are saying that inequality entertains you? People can be equal and at the same time not boring...it just means they're different, we are all different despite the fact that some label. If we all have the same thinking and can do whatever one does isn't that boring? there is no challenge that is what I mean... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alien Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 Two people, things, quantities etc cannot be more or less equal (Orwellian Animal Farm references) They either are or are not equal. Stalin and Nelson Mandela, equal or unequal? Ian Brady and Professor Sir Magdi Yacoub, equal or unequal? Myra Hindley and Mother Theresa, equal or unequal? Lost you there a bit. You seem to be arguing (or your reference does)the point against yourself. If you can't be more or less, then that leaves one equation. Equal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritPat Posted July 5, 2010 Share Posted July 5, 2010 Lost you there a bit. You seem to be arguing (or your reference does)the point against yourself. If you can't be more or less, then that leaves one equation. Equal? You conveniently left out the unequal option. 3 is not more equal than 2 they are UNEQUAL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.