Defenders: At Least They’re Trying

Kisyra said:
Henry said:
no, because neither side takes either side seriously and will completely ignore the good points the other one has in lieu of the bad points their actions bring to the table. The few among the people able to look past such things and be objective find a mixture of bad and good ideals; excuses for the way they act which undermine the good values they try to stand upon. They will pull out the good from the bad, but it takes time to sort through all the bullshit; as time and debate has proven; and in the end we continue to go around and around the same bush, beating it to death until we finally come to the full realization that it's pointless.

At which point, we have an era of peace until people forget these things again and repeat history. Neither side is right or wrong because we're all human we all make similar mistakes and we're all prone to the fallacies of those who came before us, even though knowledge dictates we should know better. Emotion will have its way 9 times out of 10 and will take us too far past where we know we should have stopped. It's the same for everybody.

Who can really say what is right or wrong when the cycle continues regardless?
Click to expand...
No. First of all, simple logic.
if A = B then A always = B
In this case 'A' being 'Both Sides' and 'B' being 'right and wrong'.
Thus, if Both Sides are ('are' being '=') right and wrong, then then they always right and wrong.

You ca'n say that cecause A = B, then ~A = B
~A = 'Not A' = Neither Side.

Either A = B, or ~A = B. You can't have both.

Furthermore, it won't 'stop'. Its not pointless - its fun, for both parties. Some people on both sides take it too far, or get caught up in moral imperatives, but at the end of the day, its fun for these people. Individual raiders and defenders might leave the contest, or switch sides, regions and organizations might expire, dissipate or leave the contest, but the whole system is self-perpetuating. Older players might leave the contest after deciding its not fun anymore, but before they do that, odds are they recruited and trained a whole new 'generation' of raiders and defenders.

It happens because there are people on both sides who enjoy doing it, Henry. And that is that.
Click to expand...
Faulty logic and deals only in absolutes. Humans are not absolute with anything.

Edit: It also only deals with two sides when there's usually at least 3 or more. Don't forget the people affected by Defenderism and Invaderism. I doubt they're having fun. I doubt Invaders and Defenders have fun when they're called on to be accountable for their actions.

Edit #2: Also deals strongly with Humanities inability to consider multiple things happening at the same time due to what they perceive to be contradiction of events, which is strongly because they make things into polar opposites that are not polar opposites. Right is not the direct opposite of wrong and vice versa.
 
Skizzy Grey said:
North East Somerset said:
Oliver is still pushing the defender are moral police and trying to do good is commendable argument in the thread, quoting Skizzy's last response. See, I'm really not sure whether it is possible to win this argument at all considering how open ended it is.
Click to expand...

And I used Ollie's post against him (again), pointing out how he is conflating RP morals with RL morals.

I share NES's belief that this discussion on the NS forum is unlikely to be fruitful, but I would like to see us articulate this distinction more often as part of our foreign policy. The termination of our close relationship with Unknown provides an opportunity in this regard, as we can speak with more credibility on these issues now than before.
Click to expand...
Fair point.

Essentially though, the issue of RP/RL morals is again though summarised best by what Oliver said in the past:

    NationStates is a game, dude. Why would you do it if not for your own enjoy---

Nevermind. Forget I asked. Two different wavelengths.
Click to expand...

I've already quoted that though, so I won't repeat myself.
 
Henry said:
Kisyra said:
Henry said:
no, because neither side takes either side seriously and will completely ignore the good points the other one has in lieu of the bad points their actions bring to the table. The few among the people able to look past such things and be objective find a mixture of bad and good ideals; excuses for the way they act which undermine the good values they try to stand upon. They will pull out the good from the bad, but it takes time to sort through all the bullshit; as time and debate has proven; and in the end we continue to go around and around the same bush, beating it to death until we finally come to the full realization that it's pointless.

At which point, we have an era of peace until people forget these things again and repeat history. Neither side is right or wrong because we're all human we all make similar mistakes and we're all prone to the fallacies of those who came before us, even though knowledge dictates we should know better. Emotion will have its way 9 times out of 10 and will take us too far past where we know we should have stopped. It's the same for everybody.

Who can really say what is right or wrong when the cycle continues regardless?
Click to expand...
No. First of all, simple logic.
if A = B then A always = B
In this case 'A' being 'Both Sides' and 'B' being 'right and wrong'.
Thus, if Both Sides are ('are' being '=') right and wrong, then then they always right and wrong.

You ca'n say that cecause A = B, then ~A = B
~A = 'Not A' = Neither Side.

Either A = B, or ~A = B. You can't have both.

Furthermore, it won't 'stop'. Its not pointless - its fun, for both parties. Some people on both sides take it too far, or get caught up in moral imperatives, but at the end of the day, its fun for these people. Individual raiders and defenders might leave the contest, or switch sides, regions and organizations might expire, dissipate or leave the contest, but the whole system is self-perpetuating. Older players might leave the contest after deciding its not fun anymore, but before they do that, odds are they recruited and trained a whole new 'generation' of raiders and defenders.

It happens because there are people on both sides who enjoy doing it, Henry. And that is that.
Click to expand...
Faulty logic and deals only in absolutes. Humans are not absolute with anything.

Edit: It also only deals with two sides when there's usually at least 3 or more. Don't forget the people affected by Defenderism and Invaderism. I doubt they're having fun. I doubt Invaders and Defenders have fun when they're called on to be accountable for their actions.

Edit #2: Also deals strongly with Humanities inability to consider multiple things happening at the same time due to what they perceive to be contradiction of events, which is strongly because they make things into polar opposites that are not polar opposites. Right is not the direct opposite of wrong and vice versa.
Click to expand...
You're making no sense.

You said that Both Sides are Right and Wrong thus Neither Side is Right or Wrong.

One does not lead to the other. Something is what it is. I'm not saying both sides are right and wrong. I'm just saying that IF Both Sides are Right and Wrong, then they're Both Right and Wrong. Both does not become neither.

Are you high when you're on Europeia, or are you always like this?
 
You're under the assumption that there is a clash of ideas when there isn't. They are both right and wrong and neither right or wrong; at the same time; since each proponent cancels the other out at the same time as making both valid.
 
Henry said:
You're under the assumption that there is a clash of ideas when there isn't. They are both right and wrong and neither right or wrong; at the same time; since each proponent cancels the other out at the same time as making both valid.
Click to expand...
I hate to be the first one to acknowledge these two and their pointless argument but...

Oh.My.God.
 
Common-Sense Politics said:
Henry said:
You're under the assumption that there is a clash of ideas when there isn't. They are both right and wrong and neither right or wrong; at the same time; since each proponent cancels the other out at the same time as making both valid.
Click to expand...
I hate to be the first one to acknowledge these two and their pointless argument but...

Oh.My.God.
Click to expand...
I know.

Basically their argument is:

If A = B
If C therefore B
Then D = Potatoes.
 
Anumia said:
Common-Sense Politics said:
Henry said:
You're under the assumption that there is a clash of ideas when there isn't. They are both right and wrong and neither right or wrong; at the same time; since each proponent cancels the other out at the same time as making both valid.
Click to expand...
I hate to be the first one to acknowledge these two and their pointless argument but...

Oh.My.God.
Click to expand...
I know.

Basically their argument is:

If A = B
If C therefore B
Then D = Potatoes.
Click to expand...
I love potatoes. So versatile.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top