Originally Posted by
DogOfDanger
Again, there is no outcome where people do not die. Your argument ultimately suggests that we cannot ever engage in utilitarian reasoning to minimize harm and maximize pleasure. This is a moronic viewpoint.
I said that you aren't outraged by the Wests puppeteering of Ukraine to further Western interests, or the Ukrainian governments insistence on reclaiming all the land and continuing the conflict... or the Allies bombing of German civilians during WW2... all of which result in large numbers of deaths of civilians. There have been 8x the deaths in Ukraine as in Gaza. If your opposition to Israel is based on the resulting deaths to civilians, and not some pro-Hamas or anti-Israel dogma, logical consistency demands that you hold an absolutist anti-war position. That is not a position where you side with the good guys or the bad guys (whoever you believe they are), it is against all war on the principle that it results in deaths of civilians. And such a position is incoherent, because it fails to contend with the practical reality or with basic utilitarian arguments, and no one takes that position seriously anywhere, not in law, or philosophy, not people with common sense... That is my point, which I have made countless times... and have just made again, and it is going to be ignored again this time too, I already know that.
You are arguing on behalf of a bunch of delusional fascists today, Hamas and the pro-Hamas protesters. You seem to have this idea that fascism and power are exclusively right wing phenomenon... in my argument I referred to the Stalinist and Maoist movements to point out fascism can occur on both sides of the political spectrum, but you're a feeble minded individual and remain oblivious while you support Hamas and pro-Hamas protesters.
It's actually pretty interesting, because Hamas is more of a right wing organization within their cultural context, in that they cling tightly to traditional fundamentalist views... however on an international stage they're taking on the role of a left wing authoritarian movement, coopted by the Wests left wing... what the two share in common is, for now, a desire for power. Of course if you were to ever put the two in a room and with sharp objects and let them be - queers for Palestine and Hamas - you'd probably return to find blood all over the walls and dismembered body parts. But what this strange alliance does say is something about the core motives of both sides.
I'm glad you at least admit that you would not have had the conviction to save Jews during Nazism. So here you basically agree with what I had written.
I could not care less whether you categorize me as an ethical or logical type... I have a STEM degree where I graduated sudo cum laude from a major university, and have worked as a software engineering tech lead for a fortune 10 company, I don't need some random persons validation of my thinking ability. Especially a person who can't string a rational argument together when begged repeatedly to do so. Nor do I need some poorly designed personality systems validation.
I think the mind-virus of socionics has so deeply infested your brain at this point that you just prescribe behavior based on these categories and convince yourself that's reality. Ironically you just tried to criticize me for putting people into categories while I'm just making deductions based on your own statements, meanwhile your entire life has been in the pursuit of literally categorizing people. It's funny, almost every time I look deeply into the insults that leftists level at me I end up finding they are doing what they accuse me of.
People shit on you for your bad ideas on socionics, and your bad ideas in general, not for your political views. They shit on your idea that practically everyone is an IEI. The also shit on the idea that you are a logical type. I usually avoid those conversations, because I don't care about socionics. But there are very few conservatives on this site, your political views are as popular and common as it gets - certainly in the United States, but most of the West these days.
Your argument is essentially "I am a good person who cares for innocent civilians, you are not" - this is a claim of virtue. In this very post I'm quoting you're also arguing that Xerx is a virtuous citizen who would have protected Jews during the holocaust.
A claim like that, made in the context of a debate on politics, is an appeal to establish a political consensus based on virtue. Because a political debate pertains to public attitudes and public policy. And political consensus is the approval of some public policy idea, just by definition.
And yet here you are, at the same time, saying you do not hold your positions out of virtue or need for approval... because you can't put 2 and 2 together. You can laugh at the fact you are a moron who cannot make basic connections.