|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
On September 13 2025 02:01 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2025 01:59 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 01:52 Nebuchad wrote:
No homophobia and legal inequality are obviously evil in my framework. So would it make a culture that has homophobia and legal inequality incorporated, more evil or less evil overall than the same culture not having these tenets (you used the word "evil", hence I am going with it... I would have said less humane/moral)? It would make it more evil, yeah. You would be talking about an evil culture.
Well, you directly go from relative (more) to absolute (evil culture). But as there are many more principles except these two, I don't think that follows. And here lies our disconnect.
It also shows that you think that a homophobic, legally unequal Palestine is "more evil" (again, I would word it differently, but more power to you) than a Palestine without these traits.
I don't think there is much to add. For you, relative statements directly convert to absolute ones. In my opinion, that is logically false and an example of a non sequitur fallacy.
We won't resolve that disagreement.
|
On September 13 2025 02:09 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2025 02:01 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 01:59 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 01:52 Nebuchad wrote:
No homophobia and legal inequality are obviously evil in my framework. So would it make a culture that has homophobia and legal inequality incorporated, more evil or less evil overall than the same culture not having these tenets (you used the word "evil", hence I am going with it... I would have said less humane/moral)? It would make it more evil, yeah. You would be talking about an evil culture. Well, you directly go from relative (more) to absolute (evil culture). But as there are many more principles except these two, I don't think that follows. And here lies our disconnect. It also shows that you think that a homophobic, legally unequal Palestine is "more evil" (again, I would word it differently, but more power to you). I don't think there is much to add. For you, relative statements directly convert to absolute ones. In my opinion, that is logically false and an example of a non sequitur fallacy. We won't resolve that disagreement.
In this specific case, do you not go from relative to absolute? Do you think that homophobia is less good than not-homophobia, but also not evil?
|
On September 13 2025 02:09 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2025 02:09 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 02:01 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 01:59 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 01:52 Nebuchad wrote:
No homophobia and legal inequality are obviously evil in my framework. So would it make a culture that has homophobia and legal inequality incorporated, more evil or less evil overall than the same culture not having these tenets (you used the word "evil", hence I am going with it... I would have said less humane/moral)? It would make it more evil, yeah. You would be talking about an evil culture. Well, you directly go from relative (more) to absolute (evil culture). But as there are many more principles except these two, I don't think that follows. And here lies our disconnect. It also shows that you think that a homophobic, legally unequal Palestine is "more evil" (again, I would word it differently, but more power to you). I don't think there is much to add. For you, relative statements directly convert to absolute ones. In my opinion, that is logically false and an example of a non sequitur fallacy. We won't resolve that disagreement. In this specific case, do you not go from relative to absolute? Do you think that homophobia is less good than not-homophobia, but also not evil?
My view: The trait itself is inhumane/immoral (or evil in your words). But it only is one among several traits that a culture can have. Hence, when you sum up all possible traits, it makes the culture more inhumane/immoral when a culture incorporates the trait, but it necessarily does not follow that the culture overall is evil, as other traits might be able to cancel it out.
Look at Magic Powers' examples... the West was more inhumane/moral when all of these things were even worse in the past. It is perhaps easier to see the relativity in the same culture over time.
|
On September 13 2025 02:22 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2025 02:09 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 02:09 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 02:01 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 01:59 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 01:52 Nebuchad wrote:
No homophobia and legal inequality are obviously evil in my framework. So would it make a culture that has homophobia and legal inequality incorporated, more evil or less evil overall than the same culture not having these tenets (you used the word "evil", hence I am going with it... I would have said less humane/moral)? It would make it more evil, yeah. You would be talking about an evil culture. Well, you directly go from relative (more) to absolute (evil culture). But as there are many more principles except these two, I don't think that follows. And here lies our disconnect. It also shows that you think that a homophobic, legally unequal Palestine is "more evil" (again, I would word it differently, but more power to you). I don't think there is much to add. For you, relative statements directly convert to absolute ones. In my opinion, that is logically false and an example of a non sequitur fallacy. We won't resolve that disagreement. In this specific case, do you not go from relative to absolute? Do you think that homophobia is less good than not-homophobia, but also not evil? My view: The trait itself is inhumane/immoral (or evil in your words). But it only is one among several traits that a culture can have. Hence, when you sum up all possible traits, it makes the culture more inhumane/immoral when a culture incorporates the trait, but it necessarily does not follow that the culture overall is evil, as other traits might be able to cancel it out. Look at Magic Powers' examples... the West was more inhumane/moral when all of these things were even worse in the past. It is perhaps easier to see the relativity in the same culture over time.
If you agree that homophobia is evil, the distinction between relative and absolute isn't important, as you also believe the absolute statement.
|
On September 13 2025 02:24 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2025 02:22 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 02:09 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 02:09 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 02:01 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 01:59 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 01:52 Nebuchad wrote:
No homophobia and legal inequality are obviously evil in my framework. So would it make a culture that has homophobia and legal inequality incorporated, more evil or less evil overall than the same culture not having these tenets (you used the word "evil", hence I am going with it... I would have said less humane/moral)? It would make it more evil, yeah. You would be talking about an evil culture. Well, you directly go from relative (more) to absolute (evil culture). But as there are many more principles except these two, I don't think that follows. And here lies our disconnect. It also shows that you think that a homophobic, legally unequal Palestine is "more evil" (again, I would word it differently, but more power to you). I don't think there is much to add. For you, relative statements directly convert to absolute ones. In my opinion, that is logically false and an example of a non sequitur fallacy. We won't resolve that disagreement. In this specific case, do you not go from relative to absolute? Do you think that homophobia is less good than not-homophobia, but also not evil? My view: The trait itself is inhumane/immoral (or evil in your words). But it only is one among several traits that a culture can have. Hence, when you sum up all possible traits, it makes the culture more inhumane/immoral when a culture incorporates the trait, but it necessarily does not follow that the culture overall is evil, as other traits might be able to cancel it out. Look at Magic Powers' examples... the West was more inhumane/moral when all of these things were even worse in the past. It is perhaps easier to see the relativity in the same culture over time. If you agree that homophobia is evil, the distinction between relative and absolute isn't important, as you also believe the absolute statement.
Yes, the trait-level judgement in regards to the trait "homophobia" is absolute (to me inhuman/immoral... to you evil).
But the system-level judgement is not.
The relative versus absolute distinction on the system-level is important and valid.
I think what you are doing is insisting on the "evil"-label and treating it as the operative category. From there, you argue that if a trait is evil, then a culture containing that trait is evil, thus you seem to operate in a binary.
I on the other hand think that inhuman/immoral traits leave room for gradation on the system-level. Traits can be immoral and cultures more or less humane and thus there is room for relative moral evaluation on a spectrum instead of a binary that you seem to deploy.
As every culture has at least one evil trait, I think that in your framework all cultures are evil, which would make the label meaningless. That's why I think a relative moral evaluation is preferable.
|
On September 13 2025 02:39 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2025 02:24 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 02:22 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 02:09 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 02:09 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 02:01 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 01:59 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 01:52 Nebuchad wrote:
No homophobia and legal inequality are obviously evil in my framework. So would it make a culture that has homophobia and legal inequality incorporated, more evil or less evil overall than the same culture not having these tenets (you used the word "evil", hence I am going with it... I would have said less humane/moral)? It would make it more evil, yeah. You would be talking about an evil culture. Well, you directly go from relative (more) to absolute (evil culture). But as there are many more principles except these two, I don't think that follows. And here lies our disconnect. It also shows that you think that a homophobic, legally unequal Palestine is "more evil" (again, I would word it differently, but more power to you). I don't think there is much to add. For you, relative statements directly convert to absolute ones. In my opinion, that is logically false and an example of a non sequitur fallacy. We won't resolve that disagreement. In this specific case, do you not go from relative to absolute? Do you think that homophobia is less good than not-homophobia, but also not evil? My view: The trait itself is inhumane/immoral (or evil in your words). But it only is one among several traits that a culture can have. Hence, when you sum up all possible traits, it makes the culture more inhumane/immoral when a culture incorporates the trait, but it necessarily does not follow that the culture overall is evil, as other traits might be able to cancel it out. Look at Magic Powers' examples... the West was more inhumane/moral when all of these things were even worse in the past. It is perhaps easier to see the relativity in the same culture over time. If you agree that homophobia is evil, the distinction between relative and absolute isn't important, as you also believe the absolute statement. Yes, the trail-level judgement in regards to the trait "homophobia" is absolute (to me inhuman/immoral... to you evil).
As a result, when you insisted that I mischaracterized your view by replacing a relative with an absolute, that was just bullshit whining from a baby?
|
On September 13 2025 02:43 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2025 02:39 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 02:24 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 02:22 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 02:09 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 02:09 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 02:01 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 01:59 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 01:52 Nebuchad wrote:
No homophobia and legal inequality are obviously evil in my framework. So would it make a culture that has homophobia and legal inequality incorporated, more evil or less evil overall than the same culture not having these tenets (you used the word "evil", hence I am going with it... I would have said less humane/moral)? It would make it more evil, yeah. You would be talking about an evil culture. Well, you directly go from relative (more) to absolute (evil culture). But as there are many more principles except these two, I don't think that follows. And here lies our disconnect. It also shows that you think that a homophobic, legally unequal Palestine is "more evil" (again, I would word it differently, but more power to you). I don't think there is much to add. For you, relative statements directly convert to absolute ones. In my opinion, that is logically false and an example of a non sequitur fallacy. We won't resolve that disagreement. In this specific case, do you not go from relative to absolute? Do you think that homophobia is less good than not-homophobia, but also not evil? My view: The trait itself is inhumane/immoral (or evil in your words). But it only is one among several traits that a culture can have. Hence, when you sum up all possible traits, it makes the culture more inhumane/immoral when a culture incorporates the trait, but it necessarily does not follow that the culture overall is evil, as other traits might be able to cancel it out. Look at Magic Powers' examples... the West was more inhumane/moral when all of these things were even worse in the past. It is perhaps easier to see the relativity in the same culture over time. If you agree that homophobia is evil, the distinction between relative and absolute isn't important, as you also believe the absolute statement. Yes, the trail-level judgement in regards to the trait "homophobia" is absolute (to me inhuman/immoral... to you evil). As a result, when you insisted that I mischaracterized your view by replacing a relative with an absolute, that was just bullshit whining from a baby?
That's not whining, it is pointing out a category error. You're treating "a culture has one evil (your word) trait" the same as "the culture itself is evil". That's a fallacy of composition.
I've said it already: traits can be judged absolutely, but cultures need to be judged comparatively on a spectrum. Otherwise, in your framework, every culture is evil, which makes the word meaningless.
|
On September 13 2025 02:51 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2025 02:43 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 02:39 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 02:24 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 02:22 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 02:09 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 02:09 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 02:01 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 01:59 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 01:52 Nebuchad wrote:
No homophobia and legal inequality are obviously evil in my framework. So would it make a culture that has homophobia and legal inequality incorporated, more evil or less evil overall than the same culture not having these tenets (you used the word "evil", hence I am going with it... I would have said less humane/moral)? It would make it more evil, yeah. You would be talking about an evil culture. Well, you directly go from relative (more) to absolute (evil culture). But as there are many more principles except these two, I don't think that follows. And here lies our disconnect. It also shows that you think that a homophobic, legally unequal Palestine is "more evil" (again, I would word it differently, but more power to you). I don't think there is much to add. For you, relative statements directly convert to absolute ones. In my opinion, that is logically false and an example of a non sequitur fallacy. We won't resolve that disagreement. In this specific case, do you not go from relative to absolute? Do you think that homophobia is less good than not-homophobia, but also not evil? My view: The trait itself is inhumane/immoral (or evil in your words). But it only is one among several traits that a culture can have. Hence, when you sum up all possible traits, it makes the culture more inhumane/immoral when a culture incorporates the trait, but it necessarily does not follow that the culture overall is evil, as other traits might be able to cancel it out. Look at Magic Powers' examples... the West was more inhumane/moral when all of these things were even worse in the past. It is perhaps easier to see the relativity in the same culture over time. If you agree that homophobia is evil, the distinction between relative and absolute isn't important, as you also believe the absolute statement. Yes, the trail-level judgement in regards to the trait "homophobia" is absolute (to me inhuman/immoral... to you evil). As a result, when you insisted that I mischaracterized your view by replacing a relative with an absolute, that was just bullshit whining from a baby? That's not whining, it is pointing out a category error. You're treating "a culture has one evil (your word) trait" the same as "the culture itself is evil". That's a fallacy of composition. I've said it already: traits can be judged absolutely, but cultures need to be judged comparatively on a spectrum. Otherwise, in your framework, every culture is evil, which makes the word meaningless.
What are some of the good traits of the radical islam culture, in your view, that offset all the bad and make it so that, even though they oppress women, throw gay people off of roofs and kill infidels, they can't be described as evil?
|
Why do you want to talk about Islam all of a sudden? Again, I was speaking about Palestine, not Islam as a whole... It seems like you are still fighting windmills in your head.
I'd also like to explore your framework more. Can you name three non-evil countries in your framework?
|
On September 13 2025 03:06 PremoBeats wrote:
Why do you want to talk about Islam all of a sudden? Again, I was speaking about Palestine, not Islam as a whole... It seems like you are still fighting windmills in your head.
You were talking about homophobia, do you reckon homophobia comes from radical islam or from Palestine you clown
|
On September 13 2025 03:15 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2025 03:06 PremoBeats wrote:
Why do you want to talk about Islam all of a sudden? Again, I was speaking about Palestine, not Islam as a whole... It seems like you are still fighting windmills in your head. You were talking about homophobia, do you reckon homophobia comes from radical islam or from Palestine you clown
In different countries there are extremely different brands of Islam. Talking about Islam makes the discussion unnecessarily more complex.
So I will give you positive examples of Palestinian culture that I think are worth noting:
Hospitality, strong family bonds, community solidarity, extremely positive mindset in spite of the circumstances they have to endure, oral storytelling traditions, dabke, resilience, their cuisine, generosity with food, intergenerational respect, coffee culture, strive for bettering their situation.
Some of them might not apply everywhere (I've only been to the West Bank), but these are some that come to mind.
I'd also like to explore your framework more. Can you name three non-evil countries in your framework?
Do you think that homophobia is only prevalent in radical Islam?
|
All right so I apologize, I misunderstood you. When you said that Palestiniens were morally inferior to the West, I thought that you were referring to radical islam, you know, with the treatment of women, infidels and minorities. Turns out I was wrong! You were talking about something else. So, what was that other thing?
|
On September 13 2025 03:29 Nebuchad wrote:
All right so I apologize, I misunderstood you. When you said that Palestiniens were morally inferior to the West, I thought that you were referring to radical islam, you know, with the treatment of women, infidels and minorities. Turns out I was wrong! You were talking about something else. So, what was that other thing?
Isn't Islam very strongly influencing Palestinian culture? Didn't you say so yourself? Homophobia is part of Palestinian culture. It doesn't matter if it came from Islam or pre-historic Martian texts. So yes, I think one of the reasons that Palestinian culture is more inhumane/immoral than Western culture is homophobia.
I'd also like to explore your framework more. Can you name three non-evil countries in your framework?
Do you think that homophobia is only prevalent in radical Islam?
|
On September 13 2025 03:35 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2025 03:29 Nebuchad wrote:
All right so I apologize, I misunderstood you. When you said that Palestiniens were morally inferior to the West, I thought that you were referring to radical islam, you know, with the treatment of women, infidels and minorities. Turns out I was wrong! You were talking about something else. So, what was that other thing? Isn't Islam very strongly influencing Palestinian culture? Didn't you say so yourself? Homophobia is part of Palestinian culture. It doesn't matter if it came from Islam or pre-historic Martian texts. So yes, I think one of the reasons that Palestinian culture is more inhumane/immoral than Western culture is homophobia.
I see, so when you said that I brought up islam and it was a change of topic two posts ago, you were lying then, as you knew that we were already talking about islam? That sounds dishonest. I wonder why you would be dishonest like that. I suspect that you didn't have a very good answer to the question and you were just stalling. So let's go back to the question, what are some of the positive traits of cultures "strongly influenced" by radical islam that you think are so good that they offset the treatment of women, infidels and minorities, and make it so that you can only say that they are "relatively evil" and not "absolutely evil"?
|
On September 13 2025 03:42 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2025 03:35 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 03:29 Nebuchad wrote:
All right so I apologize, I misunderstood you. When you said that Palestiniens were morally inferior to the West, I thought that you were referring to radical islam, you know, with the treatment of women, infidels and minorities. Turns out I was wrong! You were talking about something else. So, what was that other thing? Isn't Islam very strongly influencing Palestinian culture? Didn't you say so yourself? Homophobia is part of Palestinian culture. It doesn't matter if it came from Islam or pre-historic Martian texts. So yes, I think one of the reasons that Palestinian culture is more inhumane/immoral than Western culture is homophobia. I see, so when you said that I brought up islam and it was a change of topic two posts ago, you were lying then, as you knew that we were already talking about islam? That sounds dishonest. I wonder why you would be dishonest like that. I suspect that you didn't have a very good answer to the question and you were just stalling. So let's go back to the question, what are some of the positive traits of cultures "strongly influenced" by radical islam that you think are so good that they offset the treatment of women, infidels and minorities, and make it so that you can only say that they are "relatively evil" and not "absolutely evil"?
You brought up Islam now and back then. I only talked about it to make clear that I never said anything about it, lol (see my quotes one page ago).
I already gave you Palestinian cultural traits that I think are positive.
Are you evading these on purpose?
I'd also like to explore your framework more. Can you name three non-evil countries in your framework?
Do you think that homophobia is only prevalent in radical Islam?
|
On September 13 2025 03:47 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2025 03:42 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 03:35 PremoBeats wrote:On September 13 2025 03:29 Nebuchad wrote:
All right so I apologize, I misunderstood you. When you said that Palestiniens were morally inferior to the West, I thought that you were referring to radical islam, you know, with the treatment of women, infidels and minorities. Turns out I was wrong! You were talking about something else. So, what was that other thing? Isn't Islam very strongly influencing Palestinian culture? Didn't you say so yourself? Homophobia is part of Palestinian culture. It doesn't matter if it came from Islam or pre-historic Martian texts. So yes, I think one of the reasons that Palestinian culture is more inhumane/immoral than Western culture is homophobia. I see, so when you said that I brought up islam and it was a change of topic two posts ago, you were lying then, as you knew that we were already talking about islam? That sounds dishonest. I wonder why you would be dishonest like that. I suspect that you didn't have a very good answer to the question and you were just stalling. So let's go back to the question, what are some of the positive traits of cultures "strongly influenced" by radical islam that you think are so good that they offset the treatment of women, infidels and minorities, and make it so that you can only say that they are "relatively evil" and not "absolutely evil"? You brought up Islam back then. I only talked about it to make clear that I never said anything about it, lol (see my quotes one page ago). I already gave you Palestinian cultural traits that I think are positive. Are you evading these on purpose?
I'm not evading them on purpose I just thought it would be fun to make you wriggle one more time between saying that all of the bad things from palestinian culture come from radical islam and saying that you aren't talking about islam. It makes you look deeply stupid, and I think you don't enjoy that, which in turns means I enjoy it.
You mentioned a few things about palestinian culture that you thought were good, like hospitality, resilience and food, that's cool. I was trying to offset the evil of killing gay people and infidels and oppressing women, however. In my opinion that doesn't cut it, I think if someone throws a gay person off of a roof and then he comes home and serves me a good meal, overall I would still qualify the evil as being larger than the good. Mayhaps you disagree?
|
I am not talking about Islam. I am talking about Palestinian culture. If you think they are the same, like you are unable to differentiate between absolute and relative judgements, that is beyond me.
So according to you, Palestinian culture is largely evil? Or simply as evil as all other cultures, as it only takes one evil to make the whole culture evil, according to your framework?
I'd also like to explore your framework more. Can you name three non-evil countries in your framework?
Do you think that homophobia is only prevalent in radical Islam?
|
On September 13 2025 04:02 PremoBeats wrote:
I am not talking about Islam. I am talking about Palestinian culture. If you think they are the same, like you are unable to differentiate between absolute and relative judgements, that is beyond me.
So according to you, Palestinian culture is largely evil? Or simply as evil as all other cultures, as it only takes one evil to make the whole culture evil, according to your framework?
I'd also like to explore your framework more. Can you name three non-evil countries in your framework?
Do you think that homophobia is only prevalent in radical Islam?
The things that you criticize about palestinian culture, which make it so that you believe it is fair to say that Palestine is morally worse than the west, come from radical islam. We know because you literally said it yourself one post later. So clearly we are talking about the same thing, and you're just stalling. It is obvious to everyone, including yourself.
Do you believe that palestinian food and hospitality are good enough to make it so that the oppression of women and gay people is only relatively evil and not absolutely evil, very simple question my dude.
|
On September 13 2025 04:09 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2025 04:02 PremoBeats wrote:
I am not talking about Islam. I am talking about Palestinian culture. If you think they are the same, like you are unable to differentiate between absolute and relative judgements, that is beyond me.
So according to you, Palestinian culture is largely evil? Or simply as evil as all other cultures, as it only takes one evil to make the whole culture evil, according to your framework?
I'd also like to explore your framework more. Can you name three non-evil countries in your framework?
Do you think that homophobia is only prevalent in radical Islam? The things that you criticize about palestinian culture, which make it so that you believe it is fair to say that Palestine is morally worse than the west, come from radical islam. We know because you literally said it yourself one post later. So clearly we are talking about the same thing, and you're just stalling. It is obvious to everyone, including yourself. Do you believe that palestinian food and hospitality are good enough to make it so that the oppression of women and gay people is only relatively evil and not absolutely evil, very simple question my dude.
We are talking about homophobia inside Palestinian culture that hails from Islam. Islam is irrelevant here, as the theme was Palestinian culture in relation to Western culture, not Islam, which has other traits than things that are unique to Palestine and vice versa.
As long as you evade my questions, I won't answer yours.
Or even better: I think both of us have spammed this forum enough. As my listening practice is over and we won't agree anyways, why don't we simply call it quits? You already had your copy-paste-text at the ready when you attacked me for my relative versus absolute judgement differentiation and I think these past back-and-forths equipped me with enough content to write one of my own.
|
On September 13 2025 04:14 PremoBeats wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2025 04:09 Nebuchad wrote:On September 13 2025 04:02 PremoBeats wrote:
I am not talking about Islam. I am talking about Palestinian culture. If you think they are the same, like you are unable to differentiate between absolute and relative judgements, that is beyond me.
So according to you, Palestinian culture is largely evil? Or simply as evil as all other cultures, as it only takes one evil to make the whole culture evil, according to your framework?
I'd also like to explore your framework more. Can you name three non-evil countries in your framework?
Do you think that homophobia is only prevalent in radical Islam? The things that you criticize about palestinian culture, which make it so that you believe it is fair to say that Palestine is morally worse than the west, come from radical islam. We know because you literally said it yourself one post later. So clearly we are talking about the same thing, and you're just stalling. It is obvious to everyone, including yourself. Do you believe that palestinian food and hospitality are good enough to make it so that the oppression of women and gay people is only relatively evil and not absolutely evil, very simple question my dude. We are talking about homophobia inside Palestinian culture that hails from Islam. Islam is irrelevant here, as the theme was Palestinian culture in relation to Western culture, not Islam, which has other traits than things that are unique to Palestine. As long as you evade my questions, I won't answer yours. Or even better: I think both of us have spammed this forum enough. As my listening practice is over and we won't agree anyways, why don't we simply call it quits? You already had your copy-paste-text at the ready when you attacked me for my relative versus absolute judgement differentiation and I think these past back-and-forths equipped me with enough content to write one of my own.
That's okay I don't really care if you don't answer my questions. I wanted to show that you obviously believe that Palestinians have evil values, and not only values that are bad relative to the West, and you only pretended to believe that the "relativity" of the evil was important because you wanted to dishonestly whine about being misrepresented. I think I've done that successfully, it is obvious that you don't think that good food and hospitability are enough to offset the treatment of women and minorities in places "strongly influenced" by radical islam.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
