Borussia Dortmund football team bus hit by explosion

[Noradin]

I see you have serious issues with following the simple thought process of mine so I will use simpler terms:

When you eat food - you also eat calories.
When you have aim - you have motivation.

Refer to bold and italics to find pairs.

Maybe you should try to yourself think less simple instead?

Coincidence is not equality.
And you claiming something does not make it so.
You do not have final authority to define language.
These two words are already defined, and they have definitions different from each other.

Redefining them to be one and the same and then pointing at said redefinition as "proof" is a fallancy.

[StayTuned]

Maybe you should try to yourself think less simple instead?

Coincidence is not equality.
And you claiming something does not make it so.
You do not have final authority to define language.
These two words are already defined, and they have definitions different from each other.

Redefining them to be one and the same and then pointing at said redefinition as "proof" is a fallancy.

What is this even supposed to mean....

[Noradin]

Again, I had that viewpoint as well. But you are in fact taking the easy route out of it, by thinking materialistic things are what they truly want.

They aren't humans are motivated by feelings, and feelings can be affected by materialistic things and immarterialistic things.
If you give them the feeling that they are worth something then they will be less likely to search out alternatives that promise to give them a feeling of self-worth.
A way to successfully earn something works best, most of the time. Just make sure it isn't earning something in the afterlife supposedly gained by dying a suizide bomber, and that your own self-worth isn't defined by dominating others.

- - - Updated - - -

What is this even supposed to mean....

Think about it or ask questions.
Reading the other posts we made might help, too.

Elim Garak's argument subsist of claiming "aim" and "motivation" are the same and then presenting his own claim as proof that he is right.

[StayTuned]

Think about it or ask questions.
Reading the other posts we made might help, too.

Elim Garak's argument subsist of claiming "aim" and "motivation" are the same and then presenting his own claim as proof that he is right.

But he's right though.

You cannot have aim without motivation and vice versa. While not technically the same thing, they are both ends of the same string.

Your aim is to eat a banana. Your motivation is that you are hungry. If you remove hunger, you'd have to look for another motivation to eat a banana despite not being hungry.

Your aim is to steal a million dollars. Your motivation could be jealousy, or fear because you are dirt poor.

And so forth.

[Noradin]

But he's right though.

You cannot have aim without motivation and vice versa. While not technically the same thing, they are both ends of the same string.

Your aim is to eat a banana. Your motivation is that you are hungry. If you remove hunger, you'd have to look for another motivation to eat a banana despite not being hungry.

Your aim is to steal a million dollars. Your motivation could be jealousy, or fear because you are dirt poor.

He is not right because he claims they are the same thing.
Not that they are connected, not that they coincide, but that they are the same thing.

And as you have pointed out in your examples "aim" and "motivation" are independent of each other.

If you aim is to eat a banana, then your motivation could be that you are hungry, or that you like the taste.
If your motivation is hunger, then your aim might be to eat a banana, or to eat an apple.

If your aim is to steal a million dollars, your motivation might be jealousy, or to save your kidnapped loved one by paying the ransom.

As you yourself have pointed out, aim and motivation are connected, but not the same thing at all.
He argues that they are the same. That is wrong.

(And, technically, you can have "aim" without "motivation", and vice versa, but it seldom happens to mentally healthy people.)

[StayTuned]

(And, technically, you can have "aim" without "motivation", and vice versa, but it seldom happens to mentally healthy people.)

Even if your brain is damaged, I think that there is an underlying motivation for every action, although with those patients it would be near impossible to figure out what the motivation truly is.

Our brain works in such a way that motivation is the ultimate force that keeps us going. Our brain has constant urges and we don't even realize all of them actively.

[Noradin]

Even if your brain is damaged, I think that there is an underlying motivation for every action, although with those patients it would be near impossible to figure out what the motivation truly is.

Our brain works in such a way that motivation is the ultimate force that keeps us going. Our brain has constant urges and we don't even realize all of them actively.

Yes.
But in those cases "motivation" isn't really the worde one would use anymore, at least not in a moral sense.

[Deleted]

Even if your brain is damaged, I think that there is an underlying motivation for every action, although with those patients it would be near impossible to figure out what the motivation truly is.

Our brain works in such a way that motivation is the ultimate force that keeps us going. Our brain has constant urges and we don't even realize all of them actively.

Motivation and objective are of course deeply intertwined, that doesn't make the feeling of hunger identical to the act of eating a banana though.

[Slant]

Again, I had that viewpoint as well. But you are in fact taking the easy route out of it, by thinking materialistic things are what they truly want.

While I could for sure accept that for some of the highest members, money and slaves are the shit they want, for a good chunk, I'd say more than 90%, it's definitely all just about their beliefs. If you'd offer them just money, they wouldn't do what they're doing. Then the rest of them is either politically motivated or just mad.

You cannot say superstition is not the cause of this when those who don't believe only make up a couple of guys in their higher ranks.

Again, it would be along the lines of saying the Pope is just a schemer. Of course, it's easy to say from the viewpoint of an atheist. Believers on the other hand deeply believe in what the Pope and the Bible says and couldn't even fathom life without it.

Do tell me, if their beliefs are just a tool, what other tool could they even think of using to accomplish anything? It's hard to think of one for me that wouldn't be classified as a new religion altogether.

I do not consider viewing them as mere criminals the "easy route", to be honest. It's the rational route. Looking at the kinds of people that keep repeating their religion bashing, I honestly don't see how the religious argument can be considered "the harder" route. They don't even invest 2s in their argument. Whereas I have to actually argue the case and explain just how fucked up our perspective already is.

I don't care if they believe in their religion or not. The key is, they believe enough so that some dipshit can come along and quote a random sentence out of context that goes "kill all unbelievers!" and they go for it. That doesn't mean the religion is inherently evil, it means you have dumb people on one side and a clever criminal on the other side.

Look, I can make the same argument without religion at all. Dumb dude comes along, clever criminal goes "Hey, I'll make America great again, I will give you tax cuts, free healthcare, more pride, I'll do anything you ever wanted!" and the dumb dude goes ahead and votes for him. And this is not "dumb" dumb people, it's actually somewhat educated people that have the ability to read. And it has nothing to do with religion.

This is called "a scam" or "fraud" or whatever you'd like to call it when someone lies outrageously at the other and because of a severe lack of proper informational sources, they are forced to believe whatever he says.

Look at NK, those guys probably actually think the US doesn'T exist anymore, because some dipshit Kim posted a fake video of NYC being nuked on the internet. I am assuming that video was spread in NK as well.

This is how propaganda works. Everywhere. But it's not just religion, it's propaganda that's the enemy. And propaganda is really quite pragmatic in that it doesn't actually give two shits about how it lies to you. The only thing that matters is that you are motivated to do whatever it is propaganda intended for you to do.

As for your last question, the other tools: Wealth, security, fighting "the good fight", protecting your family... heck, they most often blow themselves up because some dipshit told them they'd pay for whatever their family needs for the rest of their lives. You're not thinking day-to-day pragmatic enough. There are a billion things you can promise a dude that's living in an actual warzone without clean water or even food on a regular basis, who's already fucked up because the US keeps bombing their land all the time... in Europe, we like to play the lottery. In Syria they play it, too. Except it's a bit more serious when they "win" it...

[StayTuned]

I don't care if they believe in their religion or not. The key is, they believe enough so that some dipshit can come along and quote a random sentence out of context that goes "kill all unbelievers!" and they go for it. That doesn't mean the religion is inherently evil, it means you have dumb people on one side and a clever criminal on the other side.

Look, I can make the same argument without religion at all. Dumb dude comes along, clever criminal goes "Hey, I'll make America great again, I will give you tax cuts, free healthcare, more pride, I'll do anything you ever wanted!" and the dumb dude goes ahead and votes for him. And this is not "dumb" dumb people, it's actually somewhat educated people that have the ability to read. And it has nothing to do with religion.

You know, the fucked up thing is, I can't say anything about what you wrote because dwelling on that matter will 100% give me an infraction which would be my ban.

So let's just call it for today. Maybe at some point we can have this discussion without me having to beat around the bushes that much.

Kinda pisses me off anyway since I am unaware of any board where quality discussions surrounding this topic are possible.

Let's just put it this way. You are right about most things. But you are also wrong thinking that it would be that easy to accomplish what middle eastern terror organizations accomplished without religion.

We kinda killed the thread anyway, we went far too offtopic.

[Slant]

Let's just put it this way. You are right about most things. But you are also wrong thinking that it would be that easy to accomplish what middle eastern terror organizations accomplished without religion.

It actually is. That's the whole point of this forum's rule about no religion talk. Because it's bullshit. You can't have an argument about religion. But you're certainly allowed to discuss the effect religion has in this specific context. I've done it often enough, and at some point you'll have to address whether or not religion plays a role. I've gotten a metric ton of infractions, but never for discussing that religion is or isn't the cause. If you keep talking about the role of religion as a tool, they will probably ignore this. Mainly because we're not discussing religion but instead propaganda. And that's the core of the case I'm making. This isn't about religion, it's about propaganda, plain and simple. Where its rethoric comes from doesn't matter, because propaganda isn't picky at all about arguments. Heck, half the time they just plainly lie their asses off. Whatever convinces the dumb masses to do their bidding. Whatever it takes.

[StayTuned]

It actually is. That's the whole point of this forum's rule about no religion talk. Because it's bullshit. You can't have an argument about religion. But you're certainly allowed to discuss the effect religion has in this specific context. I've done it often enough, and at some point you'll have to address whether or not religion plays a role. I've gotten a metric ton of infractions, but never for discussing that religion is or isn't the cause. If you keep talking about the role of religion as a tool, they will probably ignore this. Mainly because we're not discussing religion but instead propaganda. And that's the core of the case I'm making. This isn't about religion, it's about propaganda, plain and simple. Where its rethoric comes from doesn't matter, because propaganda isn't picky at all about arguments. Heck, half the time they just plainly lie their asses off. Whatever convinces the dumb masses to do their bidding. Whatever it takes.

The problem is divine cause. With monetary incentives you don't get people to martyr; or at the very least you don't get them to do suicide attacks that easily. You always need a higher cause and religion is easily used for the utmost extreme forms of terrorism because it gives you absolution before thy lord. No other form of propaganda can achieve this in this day and age. None.

Of course you aren't a terrorist just because you are a Muslim, or a believer in anything for that matter. But as far as I am concerned, only religion presents you with the very ground on which you can perform these atrocities on such a scale. I mean shit, if it wasn't for Islam we'd have no Sunni/Shia issue.

Religion as a whole already lasts for millennia, our most currently active ones for just about two. That's how convenient it is for all kinds of people to use it against other types of people.

Propaganda is certainly a powerful tool, if not the most powerful tool, for mass manipulation. But you cannot use propaganda without a vessel. You gotta sell your story, and without religion, there would be no story to be told.

Now you could say psychos gonna psycho no matter what, and if there wasn't religion, we'd come up with other causes to kill each other. To that I say, how about we get rid of these causes, too? I mean, we used to brutally kill and enslave each other on the base of our skin color, and I would hope we are over this now. Last I heard being a blatant racist isn't such a great thing (I hope?). In any case I would bet that whatever issues we'd have without religion as an amplifier, our issues would be less in total and we'd have taken away a powerful tool for schemers.

[Slant]

The problem is divine cause. With monetary incentives you don't get people to martyr; or at the very least you don't get them to do suicide attacks that easily.

I'm talking in circles with you, so I'll cut it short... yes, you get to martyr people. You just need to promise to take care of their family. If you actually do that, and it seems that works, word spreads and it becomes a way to save your family from starvation. It's easier to convince yourself to believe in bullshit like 72 virgins if you know it'll help your family. All you need is a truly desperate guy.

People commit suicide for far less than living in a warzone and having your sister raped. Don't underestimate mundane bullshit and depression. Don't glorify their bullshit, either. Don't give them credit they don't deserve. Some of what they do is really just knowing human nature and exploiting the fuck out of it. Why do you need to justify their methods with some divine bullshit when it's much simpler to explain it with mundane bullshit?

Usually, the simplest explanation is the closest to the truth.

[StayTuned]

@Slant

I don't buy simple explanations. I also don't think that people would martyr just because you want to save their family from starvation. These people don't suffer starvation, they believe we are out to kill them all. For 99% of those who blow themselves up, this is a holy war.

Their family gets nothing out of it. What makes you think they'd do these things for the sake of them? They'd kill their own parents if those acted against their cause.

It's not me giving them too much credit, it's you vastly underestimating the situation

[Noradin]

Usually, the simplest explanation is the closest to the truth.

No, not really.
The reason why you start with testing simplest explanations (hypothesises) first is because one can always expand complexity, but some things are irreducible.
And because simple explanations are easier to handle.
It has to do with efficiency of the search strategy for an solution, not with the expected outcome.

In short: Simple explanations aren't prefered because they are assumed to be closer to the truth, they prefered because they are easier to handle.
If you assume they are closer to the truth by account of being simpler, then that is a fallancy.

[Slant]

@Slant

I don't buy simple explanations. I also don't think that people would martyr just because you want to save their family from starvation. These people don't suffer starvation, they believe we are out to kill them all. For 99% of those who blow themselves up, this is a holy war.

Their family gets nothing out of it. What makes you think they'd do these things for the sake of them? They'd kill their own parents if those acted against their cause.

It's not me giving them too much credit, it's you vastly underestimating the situation

Given that you haven't interviewed any of those people blowing themselves up, I doubt your conclusion that they blow themselves up for a holy war only. That is the big mystery for everyone that isn't in ISIS. And I don't buy into the superstition bullshit.

I'm not underestimating the situation, I'm reducing it to simple questions like... why does everyone revert to religion? People that were freed from IS by the Iraqi army repeatedly talked about oppression, kidnapping, people being forced to work for IS etc. This isn't the salvation for them, it's an oppressing force. When I kidnap your family and tell you "blow yourself up and they live in wealth, don't and I'll cut their heads off... oh and just so you know I mean it, here's the head of your father" what will you do? What will you do if you come from a culture where family bloody means everything?

Just how stupid do you think those guys are if you actually think they do this for some vague promise of 72 virgin hookers in heaven? Oh, you'll have the odd dipshit buying into this, but I think it's just statistically improbable that it works like that on a grand scale.

- - - Updated - - -

No, not really.
The reason why you start with testing simplest explanations (hypothesises) first is because one can always expand complexity, but some things are irreducible.
And because simple explanations are easier to handle.
It has to do with efficiency of the search strategy for an solution, not with the expected outcome.

In short: Simple explanations aren't prefered because they are assumed to be closer to the truth, they prefered because they are easier to handle.
If you assume they are closer to the truth by account of being simpler, then that is a fallancy.

Okay, fair point. I still think reducing this to religion is the wrong way to go. If we live in a secularised world, why should we have to handle that bullshit on the other side? Especially when we can just treat them like the criminals that they are? I repeat, their kind of extremism is a form of organised crime. Probably with a case of insanity mixed in. And that's how we should treat them. With police and justice systems.

[StayTuned]

Given that you haven't interviewed any of those people blowing themselves up, I doubt your conclusion that they blow themselves up for a holy war only. That is the big mystery for everyone that isn't in ISIS. And I don't buy into the superstition bullshit.

I'm not underestimating the situation, I'm reducing it to simple questions like... why does everyone revert to religion? People that were freed from IS by the Iraqi army repeatedly talked about oppression, kidnapping, people being forced to work for IS etc. This isn't the salvation for them, it's an oppressing force. When I kidnap your family and tell you "blow yourself up and they live in wealth, don't and I'll cut their heads off... oh and just so you know I mean it, here's the head of your father" what will you do? What will you do if you come from a culture where family bloody means everything?

Just how stupid do you think those guys are if you actually think they do this for some vague promise of 72 virgin hookers in heaven? Oh, you'll have the odd dipshit buying into this, but I think it's just statistically improbable that it works like that on a grand scale.

This is I think one of the few videos I can safely post here.



I can say I've spent a lot more time dwelling on these issues than you have as it seems. This is just one glimpse of example that I'm giving you.

While you are reducing this to the simplest of questions to make it easy for you, your approach is just wrong. Never try to look for easy answers.

Fucks sake, out of their own mouth it says "the family is the least important thing" (1:50).

You might not buy into that superstition bullshit, but they do. And nothing else gives them the tool set to do what they do like extreme interpretations of holy texts.

If you want to learn more we can PM on German, where I can get my points across a lot better.

- - - Updated - - -

Okay, fair point. I still think reducing this to religion is the wrong way to go. If we live in a secularised world, why should we have to handle that bullshit on the other side? Especially when we can just treat them like the criminals that they are? I repeat, their kind of extremism is a form of organised crime. Probably with a case of insanity mixed in. And that's how we should treat them. With police and justice systems.

NO, again, NO.

We have to fight them with values, secularism, humanism and before all of that, we have to stop meddling in their affairs, stop selling weapons to them, and retreat our armies from there. This is not a war that can be won with guns, police and justice. This is an ideological war and the only way to win is to achieve peace as soon as possible.

We need to work on co existence in order to de-radicalize these people. They believe we are the devils for fucks sake. They believe Jews are the devils, and we support Israel.

Like, there is so much to this, you could spend your entire lifetime studying the subject.

[Slant]

This is I think one of the few videos I can safely post here.



I can say I've spent a lot more time dwelling on these issues than you have as it seems. This is just one glimpse of example that I'm giving you.

While you are reducing this to the simplest of questions to make it easy for you, your approach is just wrong. Never try to look for easy answers.

Fucks sake, out of their own mouth it says "the family is the least important thing" (1:50).

You might not buy into that superstition bullshit, but they do. And nothing else gives them the tool set to do what they do like extreme interpretations of holy texts.

If you want to learn more we can PM on German, where I can get my points across a lot better.

- - - Updated - - -



NO, again, NO.

We have to fight them with values, secularism, humanism and before all of that, we have to stop meddling in their affairs, stop selling weapons to them, and retreat our armies from there. This is not a war that can be won with guns, police and justice. This is an ideological war and the only way to win is to achieve peace as soon as possible.

We need to work on co existence in order to de-radicalize these people. They believe we are the devils for fucks sake. They believe Jews are the devils, and we support Israel.

Like, there is so much to this, you could spend your entire lifetime studying the subject.

You're essentially calling for a crusade. Getting down to their level. You are going the easy, emotional way. And it gets a fuckton more complicated than you think it is. Basically, it boils down to this... if you continue your line of reasoning, you are, in fact, proving them right. You are legitimising everything they do. You are justifying their actions ex nunc.

The only reason why we have the moral high ground now is because we stick to our values. And they are absolutely sufficient to deal with them. We just need to stop throwing military at them and treat Syria like a giant practice range for heavy ordnance.

The interesting bit is that you're contradicting yourself, which just shows how complicated your idea is. How can you fight them with values if you forsake them like you're intending to do? How can you stop meddling in their affairs while at the same time attacking their religion? Your conclusion is right, stop meddling and stop selling weapons. But how you get there is flawed, there is an inherent logical inconsistency in your argument that puts me back.

And of course it can be won with police. With local police. Not our police, naturally.

Basically, we need to isolate them so they can duke it out, kill each other until they realise how bullshit it is and who's doing the hurting (their own people) to whom (their own people). At that point, you may have the initial launch of an enlightenment movement that may culminate in a secularised religion that is more akin to Christianity of today. Remember, they're just about a thousand years behind Christianity in religious evolution. They will get there, and then everyone will realise that all of this doing is just criminals being criminals on a very large scale.

[StayTuned]

You're essentially calling for a crusade. Getting down to their level. You are going the easy, emotional way. And it gets a fuckton more complicated than you think it is. Basically, it boils down to this... if you continue your line of reasoning, you are, in fact, proving them right. You are legitimising everything they do. You are justifying their actions ex nunc.

The only reason why we have the moral high ground now is because we stick to our values. And they are absolutely sufficient to deal with them. We just need to stop throwing military at them and treat Syria like a giant practice range for heavy ordnance.

The interesting bit is that you're contradicting yourself, which just shows how complicated your idea is. How can you fight them with values if you forsake them like you're intending to do? How can you stop meddling in their affairs while at the same time attacking their religion? Your conclusion is right, stop meddling and stop selling weapons. But how you get there is flawed, there is an inherent logical inconsistency in your argument that puts me back.

And of course it can be won with police. With local police. Not our police, naturally.

Basically, we need to isolate them so they can duke it out, kill each other until they realise how bullshit it is and who's doing the hurting (their own people) to whom (their own people). At that point, you may have the initial launch of an enlightenment movement that may culminate in a secularised religion that is more akin to Christianity of today. Remember, they're just about a thousand years behind Christianity in religious evolution. They will get there, and then everyone will realise that all of this doing is just criminals being criminals on a very large scale.

I'm sorry but democracy, freedom of speech and press, humanism, secularism... that's getting down to their level?

I'm not trying to stirr anything here but in regards to what I just wrote your whole text makes no sense. We are in total agreement in fact.

You also accuse me of forsaking them, and then you proceed to let them duke it out.

And I don't want to forsake them, I want to offer a helping hand, just not with weapons and money to buy more weapons. And certainly not with throwing bombs on them.

[Noradin]

Okay, fair point. I still think reducing this to religion is the wrong way to go. If we live in a secularised world, why should we have to handle that bullshit on the other side? Especially when we can just treat them like the criminals that they are? I repeat, their kind of extremism is a form of organised crime. Probably with a case of insanity mixed in. And that's how we should treat them. With police and justice systems.

I agree (with this bolded part), I think when it comes down to it religion is not the source but something humans use to satisfy some of their inherent needs. There are alternatives, but they aren't equally available everywhere. Cults (that might claim to be a superior form of some religion) are one of those alternatives, one of the most problematic ones.
If we want to change something then fighting only the symptoms won't help in the long run, we must offer better alternatives to satisfy those underlying needs.

I think the one at the core of this problem is the need of every human for a feeling self-worth.
That is the reason why the more developed, better-off societies with sensible wealth distribution are on average less religious and have less kids, they do not need those as much to feel they have accomplished something, that they are worth something.

You live in Germany, you should know that your justice system acts according to this already and takes steps to give criminals alternatives to falling back into bad habits out of a lack of perspectives. The same should be considered in these cases, but in addition to solving the problems in our own countries we should keep these mechanisms in mind when dealing with the countries they come from.