4 ms·

I think the Russell Conjugation is, I have principles, you have ideologies, they have dogmas. Clearly dogmas harm individuals. So do the wrong set of principles

I think the Russell Conjugation is, I have principles, you have ideologies, they have dogmas. Clearly dogmas harm individuals. So do the wrong set of principles. But does anyone care to argue that we shouldn't have principles? We should have principles, and also ideologies and dogmas, because those are different spins on the same thing.

visarga 5y ago
The problem is when some consider their ideas even more important than people's lives. Like, in Communism, you could get jailed or killed for disagreeing with the party. Same thing with the Inquisition.
- imwillofficial 5y ago
  There are some ideas more important than lives. That’s why we fight wars.
  - hammock 5y ago
    Your notion has a ring of truth and seems to be the strongest repudiation of this entire thread/post.
  - andrewflnr 5y ago
    Is that why? Wars tend to be fought, ostensibly at least, in the principle that fighting them ends/ruins fewer lives than not fighting them, and at least in many cases for the purpose of resource acquisition. In any case, the mere fact that wars are sometimes fought does not begin to imply they're actually a good idea. So if you want to prove some ideas are more important than lives, rather than just that some people with power think so: try harder.
  - pmarreck 5y ago
    And how many "just wars" were there, as objectively-reasoned as possible?
  - PeterisP 5y ago
    Interesting, looking at history, I'm not sure if "That’s why we fight wars" is valid at all - perhaps in some exceptions, but almost always not. The dominant reason for fighting wars has always been accumulating power and wealth, enforcing control and removing threats, all kinds of practical political reasons. Often some ideas or ideologies were used to motivate people to support a war or to participate in it, but as a rule they were just a small part a reason for the war itself. For example, various religious conflicts in Europe almost always have very practical reasons for being started, and religious ideas being raised as an artificial justification and motivation; WW2 was not really fought over ideologies (even though it was often framed that way in propaganda), the allies would happily tolerate fascism and holocaust if Hitler had kept to his borders; and in modern times its obvious that people aren't willing to fight wars over ideas but are willing to do so for either minerals or internal fighting to see which "clan" will get to be in power.
  - imtringued 5y ago
    We mostly fight wars because of deflation (money is no longer circulating) or the inability to represent negative interest rates and a failed land ownership system. Once all people have a place to live in, equal access to resources and the ability to participate in the economy the average citizen doesn't want a war. Of course there are more reasons. Political independence is probably the second most common reason for a war but as you move down this list, the war becomes less and less justifiable. Also, nationalism is known for creating the bloodiest wars in recorded history, so be careful.
    - imwillofficial 5y ago
      [flagged]

visarga 5y ago

The problem is when some consider their ideas even more important than people's lives. Like, in Communism, you could get jailed or killed for disagreeing with the party. Same thing with the Inquisition.

imwillofficial 5y ago
There are some ideas more important than lives. That’s why we fight wars.
- hammock 5y ago
  Your notion has a ring of truth and seems to be the strongest repudiation of this entire thread/post.
- andrewflnr 5y ago
  Is that why? Wars tend to be fought, ostensibly at least, in the principle that fighting them ends/ruins fewer lives than not fighting them, and at least in many cases for the purpose of resource acquisition. In any case, the mere fact that wars are sometimes fought does not begin to imply they're actually a good idea. So if you want to prove some ideas are more important than lives, rather than just that some people with power think so: try harder.
- pmarreck 5y ago
  And how many "just wars" were there, as objectively-reasoned as possible?
- PeterisP 5y ago
  Interesting, looking at history, I'm not sure if "That’s why we fight wars" is valid at all - perhaps in some exceptions, but almost always not. The dominant reason for fighting wars has always been accumulating power and wealth, enforcing control and removing threats, all kinds of practical political reasons. Often some ideas or ideologies were used to motivate people to support a war or to participate in it, but as a rule they were just a small part a reason for the war itself. For example, various religious conflicts in Europe almost always have very practical reasons for being started, and religious ideas being raised as an artificial justification and motivation; WW2 was not really fought over ideologies (even though it was often framed that way in propaganda), the allies would happily tolerate fascism and holocaust if Hitler had kept to his borders; and in modern times its obvious that people aren't willing to fight wars over ideas but are willing to do so for either minerals or internal fighting to see which "clan" will get to be in power.
- imtringued 5y ago
  We mostly fight wars because of deflation (money is no longer circulating) or the inability to represent negative interest rates and a failed land ownership system. Once all people have a place to live in, equal access to resources and the ability to participate in the economy the average citizen doesn't want a war. Of course there are more reasons. Political independence is probably the second most common reason for a war but as you move down this list, the war becomes less and less justifiable. Also, nationalism is known for creating the bloodiest wars in recorded history, so be careful.
  - imwillofficial 5y ago
    [flagged]