|
On November 25 2012 05:26 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On November 24 2012 23:49 zalz wrote:On November 24 2012 23:30 mcc wrote:On November 24 2012 17:58 zalz wrote:
Martyrdom is one of the most wicked things in this world, the glorification of self-destruction, the ultimate abandonment of rational self-interest, superseded by a sick urge to destroy, and be destroyed, for the propagation of an ideology.
It shows the totalitarian nature of these belief/political systems. What do they demand of their subjects? Their property? Their submission? No, they won't even stop at that, they won't stop until you give them your very life, the only existence you will ever have.
The fact that these people sacrifice their own person so willingly is indicative of a deep flaw in the human brain, one so advanced that it can easily be turned against its biological mandate of survival. These people don't just destroy themselves, they do so with a sensation of rapture, as they murder themselves and others, they feel bliss.
The problem comes back to the submission of the individual. To relgion, to the state, to the family, any institution that demands submission of the individual to the greater good, will to some degree foster these things.
What is a young Palestinian to do? His religion praises martyrs. His state deems it the highest form of dedication to the cause. His family whisper into his ear how proud they would be, in a society where familial bonds are almost everything.
Strengthen the self; understand that the individual is more important than these structures that demand blind submission to the point of self-extermination. But in a society that would censor such views, these children remain subjected to this psychological abuse.
It isn't "abandoning all reason" to them, that's your judgment.
But self-sacrifice, one for the many, the greater good. Such revolting notions still permeate even our society. What chance does some 16-year old Palestinian boy have? As in most societal issues, black and white views are naive. Self-sacrifice might be good or might be bad, based on context. I agree with you on these specific ones, and in general martyrdom. But there are many instances where I have no issue with self-sacrifice. Soldier enlisting to protect people he loves, person sacrificing himself so others may live, ... I see no issue with them, I would even say they can be praiseworthy in many situations, depending on details. People should think about their own interests, not abandon all reason and scream in ecstasy as they are destroyed for some cause they fancy, or some god they bow to. They are thinking about their own self-interests. They have decided that what they are going to do is in their best interests. Whether it actually is or not up for debate, but they wouldn't go through with it if they didn't at the very least think it in their best interest. They don't see themselves as abandoning all reason, that's your judgment. I'm very certain someone isn't going to blow themselves up if they don't think they have a good reason to do so. Granted it's just a film, I think it does a great job of showing the second side of the story you never really see. Like someone else said, it isn't as easy as black and white. Perspective has a lot to do with whether someone is labeled a terrorist or a freedom fighter.
Killing yourself is not in your self-interest, unless your every existence is torture and a non-state of being is better.
They praise these suicide bombers for their sacrifice to religion, nation, and people. They distinctly invoke the dedication of others, the submission of the self for the benefit of others.
It isn't even about whether they think it's in their own interests. A gambling addict may also think that he's making money, but that doesn't make it an accurate description of reality, regardless of how much one convinces himself.
So no, the point still stands. You only expressed your belief that these suicide bombers are delusional and/or lacking in basic English. I'll grant you both, but that doesn't change the fact that they need to strive for actual self-interest, in the literal meaning of the word.
|
On November 25 2012 06:28 zalz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 05:26 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On November 24 2012 23:49 zalz wrote:On November 24 2012 23:30 mcc wrote:On November 24 2012 17:58 zalz wrote:
Martyrdom is one of the most wicked things in this world, the glorification of self-destruction, the ultimate abandonment of rational self-interest, superseded by a sick urge to destroy, and be destroyed, for the propagation of an ideology.
It shows the totalitarian nature of these belief/political systems. What do they demand of their subjects? Their property? Their submission? No, they won't even stop at that, they won't stop until you give them your very life, the only existence you will ever have.
The fact that these people sacrifice their own person so willingly is indicative of a deep flaw in the human brain, one so advanced that it can easily be turned against its biological mandate of survival. These people don't just destroy themselves, they do so with a sensation of rapture, as they murder themselves and others, they feel bliss.
The problem comes back to the submission of the individual. To relgion, to the state, to the family, any institution that demands submission of the individual to the greater good, will to some degree foster these things.
What is a young Palestinian to do? His religion praises martyrs. His state deems it the highest form of dedication to the cause. His family whisper into his ear how proud they would be, in a society where familial bonds are almost everything.
Strengthen the self; understand that the individual is more important than these structures that demand blind submission to the point of self-extermination. But in a society that would censor such views, these children remain subjected to this psychological abuse.
It isn't "abandoning all reason" to them, that's your judgment.
But self-sacrifice, one for the many, the greater good. Such revolting notions still permeate even our society. What chance does some 16-year old Palestinian boy have? As in most societal issues, black and white views are naive. Self-sacrifice might be good or might be bad, based on context. I agree with you on these specific ones, and in general martyrdom. But there are many instances where I have no issue with self-sacrifice. Soldier enlisting to protect people he loves, person sacrificing himself so others may live, ... I see no issue with them, I would even say they can be praiseworthy in many situations, depending on details. People should think about their own interests, not abandon all reason and scream in ecstasy as they are destroyed for some cause they fancy, or some god they bow to. They are thinking about their own self-interests. They have decided that what they are going to do is in their best interests. Whether it actually is or not up for debate, but they wouldn't go through with it if they didn't at the very least think it in their best interest. They don't see themselves as abandoning all reason, that's your judgment. I'm very certain someone isn't going to blow themselves up if they don't think they have a good reason to do so. Granted it's just a film, I think it does a great job of showing the second side of the story you never really see. Like someone else said, it isn't as easy as black and white. Perspective has a lot to do with whether someone is labeled a terrorist or a freedom fighter. Killing yourself is not in your self-interest, unless your every existence is torture and a non-state of being is better. They praise these suicide bombers for their sacrifice to religion, nation, and people. They distinctly invoke the dedication of others, the submission of the self for the benefit of others. It isn't even about whether they think it's in their own interests. A gambling addict may also think that he's making money, but that doesn't make it an accurate description of reality, regardless of how much one convinces himself. So no, the point still stands. You only expressed your belief that these suicide bombers are delusional and/or lacking in basic English. I'll grant you both, but that doesn't change the fact that they need to strive for actual self-interest, in the literal meaning of the word.
If you've been told your entire life that commiting suicide in this fashion IS actually in their self interest, through the martyr worship, religious indoctrination etcetera, can't you see that it's actually possible they do believe it's in their self interest?
Ofcourse there's always a suicide bomber with a story of having a family member killed by Israeli's or other (semi)western forces but this does not go for most of the suicide bombers, hell, most of them don't even come from countries where those are militarily active, poverty can be a incentive ofcourse, but there's a hell of a lot more that has to happen to get suicide bombing to be an acceptable form of religious combat.
You don't just become a suicide worker, usually you're recruited in which case you are dirt poor, and in the rare case where you're actually looking to become one out of personal incentive you're still going to have to get into contact with the same people because they have experience and access to the necessary equipment.
I find it very difficult to believe these suicide bomber do not realize the most basic consequences of their actions, even the poor have some access to news, killing 20 civilians killed in Tel Aviv will make the Israeli's murder only 100 Palistianians as retaliation if you're lucky.
The only real incentives you could have for suicide bombing are practical, i.e. their retarded concept of heaven and/or fame, giving your family the usually substantial sum of money from the recruiters, as even a child can deduce that killing 20 enemies if that costs you 101 lives, is not worth it (and this is all going by the Israeli-Palestine conflict, if you take for instance the 911/invasion of Afganistan as example, the numbers are far more lopsided).
Ofcourse there's the cause worth dieing for logic, which is cute but pointless if you believe in something 1400 years out of date, and the reason I alluded to the Palestinian suicide squad in Monty Python's Life of Brian earlier.
|
On November 25 2012 06:28 zalz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 05:26 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On November 24 2012 23:49 zalz wrote:On November 24 2012 23:30 mcc wrote:On November 24 2012 17:58 zalz wrote:
Martyrdom is one of the most wicked things in this world, the glorification of self-destruction, the ultimate abandonment of rational self-interest, superseded by a sick urge to destroy, and be destroyed, for the propagation of an ideology.
It shows the totalitarian nature of these belief/political systems. What do they demand of their subjects? Their property? Their submission? No, they won't even stop at that, they won't stop until you give them your very life, the only existence you will ever have.
The fact that these people sacrifice their own person so willingly is indicative of a deep flaw in the human brain, one so advanced that it can easily be turned against its biological mandate of survival. These people don't just destroy themselves, they do so with a sensation of rapture, as they murder themselves and others, they feel bliss.
The problem comes back to the submission of the individual. To relgion, to the state, to the family, any institution that demands submission of the individual to the greater good, will to some degree foster these things.
What is a young Palestinian to do? His religion praises martyrs. His state deems it the highest form of dedication to the cause. His family whisper into his ear how proud they would be, in a society where familial bonds are almost everything.
Strengthen the self; understand that the individual is more important than these structures that demand blind submission to the point of self-extermination. But in a society that would censor such views, these children remain subjected to this psychological abuse.
It isn't "abandoning all reason" to them, that's your judgment.
But self-sacrifice, one for the many, the greater good. Such revolting notions still permeate even our society. What chance does some 16-year old Palestinian boy have? As in most societal issues, black and white views are naive. Self-sacrifice might be good or might be bad, based on context. I agree with you on these specific ones, and in general martyrdom. But there are many instances where I have no issue with self-sacrifice. Soldier enlisting to protect people he loves, person sacrificing himself so others may live, ... I see no issue with them, I would even say they can be praiseworthy in many situations, depending on details. People should think about their own interests, not abandon all reason and scream in ecstasy as they are destroyed for some cause they fancy, or some god they bow to. They are thinking about their own self-interests. They have decided that what they are going to do is in their best interests. Whether it actually is or not up for debate, but they wouldn't go through with it if they didn't at the very least think it in their best interest. They don't see themselves as abandoning all reason, that's your judgment. I'm very certain someone isn't going to blow themselves up if they don't think they have a good reason to do so. Granted it's just a film, I think it does a great job of showing the second side of the story you never really see. Like someone else said, it isn't as easy as black and white. Perspective has a lot to do with whether someone is labeled a terrorist or a freedom fighter. Killing yourself is not in your self-interest, unless your every existence is torture and a non-state of being is better. They praise these suicide bombers for their sacrifice to religion, nation, and people. They distinctly invoke the dedication of others, the submission of the self for the benefit of others. It isn't even about whether they think it's in their own interests. A gambling addict may also think that he's making money, but that doesn't make it an accurate description of reality, regardless of how much one convinces himself. So no, the point still stands. You only expressed your belief that these suicide bombers are delusional and/or lacking in basic English. I'll grant you both, but that doesn't change the fact that they need to strive for actual self-interest, in the literal meaning of the word.
Reducing martyrdom to "killing yourself" is absurd. You yourself noted a couple pages ago that suicide and martyrdom are not the same and that you can't apply the ethics of the one to the ethics of the other. It doesn't even necessarily need to be the case that your every existence is torture to warrant suicide that isn't "unethical", but that's a different debate.
There is nothing inherently wrong with valuing the good of others over the self just as there is nothing inherently wrong with valuing the good of the self over the good of others. The point is, if one does choose to value the good of others over the good of the self and they then act for the good of said others, then one is in fact acting in their self-interest for pursuing what they value.
Making money is quantifiable and so you can falsify a gambler who thinks they are making money but actually isn't. Value and meaning are not quantifiable. If someone values a cause as meaningful, even if they know it will lead to their death, who are you to say that their values are false or inferior to yours?
I'm not even saying that they are necessarily delusional. You seem to mistakenly consider your judgment of value absolute, which renders any other conception of value false or inferior. What you value is not what everyone values. It follows that what you consider to be in your highest self-interest (which appears to be survival) isn't necessarily going to always be as important to everyone else.
|
On November 25 2012 07:05 Scootaloo wrote:
If you've been told your entire life that commiting suicide in this fashion IS actually in their self interest, through the martyr worship, religious indoctrination etcetera, can't you see that it's actually possible they do believe it's in their self interest?
I already acknowledged that they can be under the mistaken assumption that it is. That doesn't change what the word actually means, simply that the level of delusion runs very deep, and the psychological damage inflicted on these people is extensive.
It doesn't, in the slightest, change my position.
What you're doing now is the equivalent of saying democracy is bad because North-Korea calls itself democratic.
Reducing martyrdom to "killing yourself" is absurd. You yourself noted a couple pages ago that suicide and martyrdom are not the same and that you can't apply the ethics of the one to the ethics of the other. It doesn't even necessarily need to be the case that your every existence is torture to warrant suicide that isn't "unethical", but that's a different debate.
I didn't reduce martyrdom to "killing yourself", I very intentionally used those words. Since we were speaking about the death of self in relation self-interest, I made a more generice reference "killing yourself" which applies to both martyrdom and suicide.
Now, I'm sick and tired of walking on eggshells to try and keep you from crying about semantics, only to have you (intentionally?) run headfirst into that wall, regardless of my attempts.
There is nothing inherently wrong with valuing the good of others over the self just as there is nothing inherently wrong with valuing the good of the self over the good of others. The point is, if one does choose to value the good of others over the good of the self and they then act for the good of said others, then one is in fact acting in their self-interest for pursuing what they value.
There is. That's my whole point, which is what I went into in my earlier posts, and I won't repeat the exact same thing again.
Making money is quantifiable and so you can falsify a gambler who thinks they are making money but actually isn't. Value and meaning are not quantifiable. If someone values a cause as meaningful, even if they know it will lead to their death, who are you to say that their values are false or inferior to yours?
Who am I? I am me. By what right can't I pass judgement on the values and beliefs of others? I am an individual, with the capacity to reason, judge, and pass judgement. The status quo is me casting judgement.
This carebear approach where we should all at some level respect another person's belief, simply because they believe, is ridiculous. Some ideas are bad, some ideas are good, and I won't be silent on the bad one's because it's the polite thing to do.
It is also one of those common dishonest postions, that people express, but don't adhere to themselves. Were I some west-bureau-baptist-church-crazy, you wouldn't waste a second of understanding on me, or call for civility on all sides.
Values should clash, non-violently, so that the bad ideas can be rooted out.
I'm not even saying that they are necessarily delusional. You seem to mistakenly consider your judgment of value absolute, which renders any other conception of value false or inferior. What you value is not what everyone values. It follows that what you consider to be in your highest self-interest (which appears to be survival) isn't necessarily going to always be as important to everyone else.
No, it simply appears that you don't understand what self-interest means, nor grasp the finality of death.
People that start these semantic debates, and inevitably begin to argue about wether blue really means blue, are only one step lower on the ladder of people that ruin debates than tinfoil crazies. Sadly, TL has no short supply of either.
|
On November 25 2012 08:45 zalz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 07:05 Scootaloo wrote:
If you've been told your entire life that commiting suicide in this fashion IS actually in their self interest, through the martyr worship, religious indoctrination etcetera, can't you see that it's actually possible they do believe it's in their self interest? I already acknowledged that they can be under the mistaken assumption that it is. That doesn't change what the word actually means, simply that the level of delusion runs very deep, and the psychological damage inflicted on these people is extensive. It doesn't, in the slightest, change my position. What you're doing now is the equivalent of saying democracy is bad because North-Korea calls itself democratic.
I think you misunderstand my point, they should definitely have the right to kill themselves, for whatever ridiculous notion they might believe in, from a purely logical viewpoint we should stop them, but humanity seems to not have progressed far enough yet as to officially classify religion as a mental illness, it's about knowingly trying to slaughter innocent civilians, the problem is so ingrained in Muslim society and teachings however that trying to solve the problem at anything but the root is pointless, and the root here is Islam, not poverty, poverty might lead to several forms of violence, but this feature is almost exclusive to muslims, maybe once in a blue moon a fanatic of any other denomination, for some reason there is not a significant amount of anyone but Muslims that will set up entire networks to keep the statistically negligible casualties made by suicide bombings going.
This is not some silly Manson-esque cult going for the mass suicide option before the cops break down the door, this is an entire religion that believes in the teachings of a book that justifies these actions as glorious and just.
We're lucky most Muslims can't actually read the ancient dialect of Arabic the Qu'ran written in and translations are blasphemous, if you actually believed all the commands in that book where the absolute truth, you'd be joining the Taliban as well.
|
So the ethic's of suicide and murdering.
This is a totally ethical action on the part of Muslim's. (as long as Jews die since the are trespassing on Muslim Land)
But is this a totally unethical action on the part of Christian's? (yeah of course)
There in lies the dispute.
Two snakes eating each other, find out they have ate themselves.
|
|
|
On November 25 2012 12:44 Cillas wrote:
ops article looks like hes claiming that suicide only comes from palestinian people, without discussing any historical material.
What about ireland, north spain, (japan during ww2) etc. This behaviour doesnt creates itself by just religion, it always comes out of political tension and maybe amplified by political/religious leaders.
thread should be closed, as the start is very wrong and biased
What? Did you read it? Look at the Subheadings
- Superstition
- Nationalism and Self Glorification
- Depression and social pressure
- Lack of existential value
- Terror
These are all reasons listed which people commit suicide or suicidal actions for, these aren't exclusive to Palestine, I even made listings of specific examples in some cases.
I even explained why I'm using the Palestine example, it's because almost all of the motivating forces for this specific format of suicide and suicidal tendencies in general are present with in the Palestinian-Israeli environment. The point of the OP is not just to expose a specific phenomenon, but attempting to compare examples to establish a system of logic.
|
On November 24 2012 17:58 zalz wrote:
Martyrdom is one of the most wicked things in this world, the glorification of self-destruction, the ultimate abandonment of rational self-interest, superseded by a sick urge to destroy, and be destroyed, for the propagation of an ideology.
This is a fitting description I think, although I do not attach a moral connotation on the word "wicked".
On November 24 2012 17:58 zalz wrote:
The problem comes back to the submission of the individual. To relgion, to the state, to the family, any institution that demands submission of the individual to the greater good, will to some degree foster these things.
Maybe if you assume that religious belief is really at the root of it. It seems to me that existential anger or lack of existential value as you say it is the main cause. Religion etc... are just here to facilitate the act.
How different really are traditional terrorist actions (Russian nihilists, left wing German, Italian or French terrorists of the 60-70s, all the politically motivated terrorist actions around the world) and martyrdom.
Maybe it just comes down to how desperate you are, how strong is the entity you want to see destroyed (whether an actual government or a societal system), and how much do you have your back against the wall.
Self destruction seems quite the antithesis to submission. It is the ultimate individual act. Submission would be to accept the "oppressor" (whatever it is, or however imaginary it is) rule.
Surely numerous suicides or even mass suicides occured as native indians cultures were being destroyed howard zinn excerpt. Were they more submissive than the ones falling into alcohol and depression?
On November 24 2012 17:58 zalz wrote:
Strengthen the self; understand that the individual is more important than these structures that demand blind submission to the point of self-extermination. But in a society that would censor such views, these children remain subjected to this psychological abuse.
Easy to say while living in a peaceful democracy.
In any case, to answer directly the op, I doubt it has anything to do with logic. Humans actions generally don't, we are lacking too much information and have to take shortcuts. A computer would just bug and crash.
|
On November 25 2012 15:39 harlock78 wrote:
Maybe if you assume that religious belief is really at the root of it. It seems to me that existential anger or lack of existential value as you say it is the main cause. Religion etc... are just here to facilitate the act.
Religion is a part of the problem. Saying that it just "facilitates" it, is just twisting words. It's not the sole problem, but it is a large portion of the problem. But I've never said that religion is the sole cause of it.
How different really are traditional terrorist actions (Russian nihilists, left wing German, Italian or French terrorists of the 60-70s, all the politically motivated terrorist actions around the world) and martyrdom. Maybe it just comes down to how desperate you are, how strong is the entity you want to see destroyed (whether an actual government or a societal system), and how much do you have your back against the wall. Self destruction seems quite the antithesis to submission. It is the ultimate individual act. Submission would be to accept the "oppressor" (whatever it is, or however imaginary it is) rule. Surely numerous suicides or even mass suicides occured as native indians cultures were being destroyed howard zinn excerpt. Were they more submissive than the ones falling into alcohol and depression?
It is the ultimate act of submission, because you give up literally everything that you have and are. You readily admit that there is nothing that, for example the government, cannot have, cannot take, and cannot demand, and that there is nothing that you will not give to them.
Easy to say while living in a peaceful democracy.
How is that "easy" to say? I quite clearly point out in that quote that what is the right thing, won't also be the easy thing for many of these people, and point out how difficult it is for them to even learn about the right thing whilst living in such a totalitarian regime.
|
If you take a gun and shoot yourself to the head - just so that you know - you will not die immediately. It might not take long for you to die, but it will take a few minutes of complete pain.
If you use an acid which you think is a "fast death", believe me, you will suffer extreme pain for long parts. Eventually you might die, but in a painful manner.
If you jump off a building --> same thing.
Apparently people here are considering suicide, otherwise this kind of nonsense topic wouldn't even exist. Looking at these kinds of topics just shows me how damn faithless this God-less generation has become but it's all your own fault. A happy person will not even think the thought of suicide - ever. Just know that it's not going to be painless even with the methods you think are "quick".
And you're not going to go down like a "martyr", you're going down like an egoist who hurt his mother, his father, his friends and his surrounding, plus you hurt those people who had to watch you jump in front of the train (again, not an immediate death). And you hurt those social workers who have to clean up the mess you left. A martyr is like von Stauffenberg who sacrificed his life just to try help other people. You could sort of say that J.F. Kennedy died as a martyr. A suicider - dies in disgrace and as an egoist.
|
On November 25 2012 18:10 Protoss-Bah wrote:
If you take a gun and shoot yourself to the head - just so that you know - you will not die immediately. It might not take long for you to die, but it will take a few minutes of complete pain.
If you use an acid which you think is a "fast death", believe me, you will suffer extreme pain for long parts. Eventually you might die, but in a painful manner.
If you jump off a building --> same thing.
Apparently people here are considering suicide, otherwise this kind of nonsense topic wouldn't even exist. Looking at these kinds of topics just shows me how damn faithless this God-less generation has become but it's all your own fault. A happy person will not even think the thought of suicide - ever. Just know that it's not going to be painless even with the methods you think are "quick".
And you're not going to go down like a "martyr", you're going down like an egoist who hurt his mother, his father, his friends and his surrounding, plus you hurt those people who had to watch you jump in front of the train (again, not an immediate death). And you hurt those social workers who have to clean up the mess you left. A martyr is like von Stauffenberg who sacrificed his life just to try help other people. You could sort of say that J.F. Kennedy died as a martyr. A suicider - dies in disgrace and as an egoist.
Why do you seem to get turned on at the thought of other people slowly dying? Don't you think that is a bit more perverse than any thoughts of suicide?
"Complete pain"
"suffer extreme pain for long parts"
"in a painful manner"
"not going to be painless"
"not an immediate death"
You seem deeply disturbed. Far more than any "faithless" generation that I know of.
|
"Suicide" and "suicide attack" are two different things. One of them is really despiccable and used by terrorists, but the other doesnt concern anyone but the person himself and should be acceptable since you should have the right to decide about your own life.
With the palestinians I can never understand the logic behind suicide attacks, because they serve no purpose. They wont deal enough damage to drive the Isreali out, they wont get you any sympathy from impartial bystanders, so what is the point? Instead of being the violent party they should go and watch the movie Ghandi. There is a scene where the peaceful Indians are trying to "go somewhere" and they are then beaten up by a military unit. This makes it really clear who the "wrong party" is and who needs our sympathy.
Another example of a "good use" of using your own death is James Clavell's Shogun, where the "heroine" chooses to suicide in protest over an attack and to protect her lover.
Suiciding while killing other people is just the same as murder and not a noble deed in some cause.
|
On November 25 2012 18:33 Rabiator wrote:
"Suicide" and "suicide attack" are two different things. One of them is really despiccable and used by terrorists, but the other doesnt concern anyone but the person himself and should be acceptable since you should have the right to decide about your own life.
With the palestinians I can never understand the logic behind suicide attacks, because they serve no purpose. They wont deal enough damage to drive the Isreali out, they wont get you any sympathy from impartial bystanders, so what is the point? Instead of being the violent party they should go and watch the movie Ghandi. There is a scene where the peaceful Indians are trying to "go somewhere" and they are then beaten up by a military unit. This makes it really clear who the "wrong party" is and who needs our sympathy.
Another example of a "good use" of using your own death is James Clavell's Shogun, where the "heroine" chooses to suicide in protest over an attack and to protect her lover.
Suiciding while killing other people is just the same as murder and not a noble deed in some cause.
This is the typical black and white view. Suicide while leaving kids behind or jumping in front of the train in front people is very different from someone being very old and sick and ending their life in a controlled way.
|
On November 25 2012 19:06 peacenl wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 18:33 Rabiator wrote:
"Suicide" and "suicide attack" are two different things. One of them is really despiccable and used by terrorists, but the other doesnt concern anyone but the person himself and should be acceptable since you should have the right to decide about your own life.
With the palestinians I can never understand the logic behind suicide attacks, because they serve no purpose. They wont deal enough damage to drive the Isreali out, they wont get you any sympathy from impartial bystanders, so what is the point? Instead of being the violent party they should go and watch the movie Ghandi. There is a scene where the peaceful Indians are trying to "go somewhere" and they are then beaten up by a military unit. This makes it really clear who the "wrong party" is and who needs our sympathy.
Another example of a "good use" of using your own death is James Clavell's Shogun, where the "heroine" chooses to suicide in protest over an attack and to protect her lover.
Suiciding while killing other people is just the same as murder and not a noble deed in some cause. This is the typical black and white view. Suicide while leaving kids behind or jumping in front of the train in front people is very different from someone being very old and sick and ending their life in a controlled way.
Not to mention, it's pretty ridiculous to say that suicidal bombing is the only method of suicide that effects "anyone but the person himself."
|
Killing oneself due to some misguided belief: Not martyrdom.
Being killed or tortured because of some belief and refusing to recant / convert: Martyrdom.
I think the issue being discussed here is in poor taste. So many "martyrs" these days are poorly educated, already suicidal and/or insane. Some suffering elderly person or a person who doesn't want to be in a vegetative state who want to die are also not martyrs. Martyrdom has a certain amount of persecution involved, and not persecution leading to a suicidal nature, but persecution resulting in mutilation or death, usually over matters of religious disagreements.
EDIT: Is this supposed to be a discussion on the ethics of self-sacrifice? If so, suicide bombings are not self-sacrifice in the same way as jumping into the path of a bullet to save someone, or diving on a grenade to save your friends in a trench... More like getting into an intentional accident to try and sustain an injury so that you come off looking like the victim - a con.
|
On November 25 2012 19:44 dUTtrOACh wrote:
I think the issue being discussed here is in poor taste. So many "martyrs" these days are poorly educated, already suicidal and/or insane. .
When you do martyrdom, you decide to end your life as it is now for a greater cause.
Now the question is, what could be the greater cause motivating a well-educated and mentally stable young/middle-aged man that you can't really bullshit with fairytales and who is really enjoying his life ?
It would need to be tremendous. Like, (almost) eternal glory or something similar.
In the real world, such occasions are exceptionally rare.
Thus someone achieving martyrdom without a certain degree of insanity or disatisfaction with his life seems to me impossible.
|
Great OP.
Thoroughly enjoyed reading this post.
I have nothing to say regarding this matter though. I feel the OP has hit the nail right on the head right from the get go and has taken the best plausible arguments already.
Asking us to discuss our own moral views regarding mothers encouraging children to commit suicide attacks against an enemy seems to me a rather fruitless affair.
|
On November 25 2012 19:44 dUTtrOACh wrote:
Killing oneself due to some misguided belief: Not martyrdom.
Being killed or tortured because of some belief and refusing to recant / convert: Martyrdom.
I think the issue being discussed here is in poor taste. So many "martyrs" these days are poorly educated, already suicidal and/or insane. Some suffering elderly person or a person who doesn't want to be in a vegetative state who want to die are also not martyrs. Martyrdom has a certain amount of persecution involved, and not persecution leading to a suicidal nature, but persecution resulting in mutilation or death, usually over matters of religious disagreements.
EDIT: Is this supposed to be a discussion on the ethics of self-sacrifice? If so, suicide bombings are not self-sacrifice in the same way as jumping into the path of a bullet to save someone, or diving on a grenade to save your friends in a trench... More like getting into an intentional accident to try and sustain an injury so that you come off looking like the victim - a con.
I understand that it's morally disagreeable to parallel actions of suicide bombing in particular with self sacrifice, that wasn't the main point of the argument. The main point was the fact that the motivating forces behind suicide bombing is present in the action of suicide taken for the most mundane or extreme of reasons, hence the sub headings. Whether or not we as individuals have differing moral standards of where we draw the line of acceptable behavior / moral behavior, it's impossible to simply ignore the fact that these motivating forces are fundamentally the same. To me this realization is alot more important, and in some respects both terrifying and reassuring at the same time to know that humanity shares so much in common.
|
On November 25 2012 18:10 Protoss-Bah wrote:
If you take a gun and shoot yourself to the head - just so that you know - you will not die immediately. It might not take long for you to die, but it will take a few minutes of complete pain.
If you use an acid which you think is a "fast death", believe me, you will suffer extreme pain for long parts. Eventually you might die, but in a painful manner.
If you jump off a building --> same thing.
Apparently people here are considering suicide, otherwise this kind of nonsense topic wouldn't even exist. Looking at these kinds of topics just shows me how damn faithless this God-less generation has become but it's all your own fault. A happy person will not even think the thought of suicide - ever. Just know that it's not going to be painless even with the methods you think are "quick".
And you're not going to go down like a "martyr", you're going down like an egoist who hurt his mother, his father, his friends and his surrounding, plus you hurt those people who had to watch you jump in front of the train (again, not an immediate death). And you hurt those social workers who have to clean up the mess you left. A martyr is like von Stauffenberg who sacrificed his life just to try help other people. You could sort of say that J.F. Kennedy died as a martyr. A suicider - dies in disgrace and as an egoist.
This was a very disturbing post in an otherwise good thread. You definitely seem fixated on people not dying immediately and experiencing pain why is that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
