Anders Behring Breivik 1500 Page Manifesto
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-07-2011, 01:07 PM (This post was last modified: 28-07-2011 01:09 PM by vtgadfly.)
RE: Anders Behring Breivik 1500 Page Manifesto
"Everyone is distancing themselves from this guy... most are using the "No true Scotsman" fallacy. "No way he was a true Christian... thus he must have been an Atheist!".

What I find funny (not really) about this approach is that when you try to use the same reasoning re: Muslims and Terrorism, they immediately reject it out of hand. Then they start demanding that every Muslim and their leaders denounce the act. However, when pressed for a similar denouncement, their response is "why should we, he wasn't a REAL christian" or going the Glenn Beck Route and blame the victims.






[/quote]


"these people saying he did it because he's an Atheist are straight up dirty, stank-ass, straight dirty mother fuckers. How DARE they use the death of over eighty people to score cheap fucking political points! It's disgusting! And what kind of perverted mind uses a killing spree to foment hatred?!?!

From an intellectual standpoint, they are the self-interested peddlers of simplistic analysis I mentioned above. From a life standpoint, they are wretched puke-infested feculant vomit-piles of would-be humanity.

Peace and Love and Empathy,

Matt"

Yeah... but tell me how you really feel.Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-07-2011, 02:00 PM (This post was last modified: 28-07-2011 02:10 PM by myst32.)
RE: Anders Behring Breivik 1500 Page Manifesto
(28-07-2011 12:34 PM)Ghost Wrote:  For the record, I meant in the sense of mental illness (psychopathy, sociopathy, schizophrenia) which is a completely different thing.
Ok, thanks for clarifying it. And I agree they are different.


(28-07-2011 12:34 PM)Ghost Wrote:  The beauty of a concept like memetics is that it offers insight into why people do and believe things that will ultimately kill us. Simply put, it's for no other reason than for expressing maladaptive memes. As with maladaptive genes, or any maladaptive replicator, they are self-eliminating... And they usually take their survival machines with them.
Can you recommend any good books on memetics? Not an area I know all that much about... no more than what Dawkins talks about.



(28-07-2011 12:34 PM)Ghost Wrote:  In terms of fault, with mental illness, no one asks to be sick. They're accountable because we're all accountable, but they most often aren't at fault. In terms of hyperreality, it's far more grey. Some people believe these things willingly and even in the face of evidence, while others are simply the product of their upbringing. As I mentioned before, adopting new ideas and shedding old ones is not always an easy process as it involves complex systems dynamics. So for me, "well you shoulda," isn't a very useful indicator of fault.

As for this gunman, he lived in a world very different from my own. His world was peopled by Muslims and Marxists that represented a threat so grave that he felt he needed to kill dozens of people and most likely forfeit his own life to make the world a better place. I don't know how much of that world is cultural (although I know it's some because he's not alone, which is one of the scariest parts of all of this) and how much of it is born from a mental illness that caused a break from reality (and I can only speculate that this man had to be ill), but it's likely a combination of both. How much of it is his "fault" can only be answered through investigation and diagnosis.

As far as what caused it, I agree, single-determinant theory is always crap. Life is complex and it's influenced by multiple determinants. Anyone who says otherwise is trying to simplify things, likely for personal gain.
Damn Strait!!



(28-07-2011 12:34 PM)Ghost Wrote:  When I read the OP quotes, I got the impression that he was an Atheist. Obviously he references religion heavily, but outside of the bizarre Justicar thing, I never got a sense of onward Christian soldier.
Yeah when he wrote, "I am not a very religious person" I remember thinking ahh shit... Not that it really matters... Even if the guy was a Pastor of a church they would still frame him as an Atheist.... Because, "Christians don't go off killing other people". ;-)

Reading through his work one really gets the impression that his actions have everything to do with politics and religion is more of a side note. A significant amount effort is put into painting Islam as a political ideology. Thus attacking it through political means sort of like Mccarthyism did to Communism.

(28-07-2011 01:07 PM)vtgadfly Wrote:  What I find funny (not really) about this approach is that when you try to use the same reasoning re: Muslims and Terrorism, they immediately reject it out of hand. Then they start demanding that every Muslim and their leaders denounce the act. However, when pressed for a similar denouncement, their response is "why should we, he wasn't a REAL christian"

That is the purpose of the "No true Scotsman" fallacy...

"No true Scotsman is an intentional logical fallacy, an ad hoc attempt to retain an unreasoned assertion. When faced with a counterexample to a universal claim, rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original universal claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it."

Most "groups" employ this fallacy whenever one of their members goes bat shit crazy.

“We're born alone, we live alone, we die alone. Only through our love and friendship can we create the illusion for the moment that we're not alone.” Orson Welles
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-07-2011, 02:39 PM
RE: Anders Behring Breivik 1500 Page Manifesto
(28-07-2011 01:07 PM)vtgadfly Wrote:  What I find funny (not really) about this approach is that when you try to use the same reasoning re: Muslims and Terrorism, they immediately reject it out of hand. Then they start demanding that every Muslim and their leaders denounce the act. However, when pressed for a similar denouncement, their response is "why should we, he wasn't a REAL christian"

That is the purpose of the "No true Scotsman" fallacy...

"No true Scotsman is an intentional logical fallacy, an ad hoc attempt to retain an unreasoned assertion. When faced with a counterexample to a universal claim, rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original universal claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it."

Most "groups" employ this fallacy whenever one of their members goes bat shit crazy.
[/quote]

So what does the bat shit crazy group rely on, I wonder? Smile Sorry, it has been a while since I have had a conversation with anyone who doesn't believe in the tooth fairy. Thanks for the input.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-07-2011, 02:57 PM (This post was last modified: 28-07-2011 03:06 PM by myst32.)
RE: Anders Behring Breivik 1500 Page Manifesto
(28-07-2011 02:39 PM)vtgadfly Wrote:  So what does the bat shit crazy group rely on, I wonder? Smile Sorry, it has been a while since I have had a conversation with anyone who doesn't believe in the tooth fairy. Thanks for the input.

It depends on how they want to be perceived. For example several radical Islamic groups tried to take credit for the Oslo bombing... To them "inclusion" of the killer to their group furthers their goals.

“We're born alone, we live alone, we die alone. Only through our love and friendship can we create the illusion for the moment that we're not alone.” Orson Welles
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: