On this day i would like to see what people think a philosopher would say towards the ‘terrorist’ attacks on USA.
Watching the News i heard an American Preist say that he has seen more people see the ‘light’, and become more ’ christian’. What do you guys think?
Your question is vague, but y thoughts are:
the world as it rotates has not changed.
Not since 9.11.01 not since 9.11.1001 not since 9.11.3001 bce.
A boy grows up dealing with customs, culture, religion, and his hormones as do girls.
A man deals with ecenomics, politics, culture, religion and his indiferences
as do women.
9.11.01 was a travisty. 3000/5000+ people Killed all in the name of the same thing that people have died for through out time. While their deaths are important to those they knew, the world will not change no matter how high the numbers increase. During the American Civil War there were some of the bloodiest battles to that date(antitem wasnt it?). Yet during the World wars they got even deadlier with higher body counts. Yet we still have war infact the president for some silly reason is demanding a new one when he has yet to finish the other one.
Socrates died to prove that people live for the state. John F Kenedy Said to ask not what your goverement can do for you ask what you can do for your goverment. Even in Japanese fudal periods people choose suicide over disgrace of the goverment. Does everyones brain using logic demand Goverment > survival? I thought it was survival > all else.
If religion is opium of the masses then Goverement is the reason why opium is in such heavy use, Escapeism into religion from goverement.
As for the priest all he is seeing as a preist 400 years ago saw people fearfull of their lonesome life and death turn to what they hope to be a answer.
Concise and very well said Blu, bravo.
Osama’s ambition was to shake the Muslim world out of its sleep. He knew that the American’s were planning occupation of the Arab oil fields.
So he had a number of aims.
1. To polarize the Muslim and Western world.
2. To pre-empt the coming American assualt and force them off balance.
3. To test the possiblites of sychronised neuclear attack on several major American cities. Use aircraft as the deliverly system and suicide bomber as the guidance.
I believe he has suceeded.
At the moment he is waiting in Pakistan for the government to collaspe. To grab some nuke’s.
The guy’s an ‘evil’ genius, strait out of James Bond.
We now live in the scary world where fiction and reality coincide.
It’s a pity, that the American’s have fallen into his trap.
But they are fools!
Has anyone read Gore Vidal’s polemic on 9/11? Although somehat incoherent, it’s very enlightening.
Gore Vidal’s an erudite old jackass. He never lost his idealism, but it solidified so much with age that now it’s turned into dogma; he’s just incapable of seeing the world in anything but black and white.
9-11 conspiracy theorists have more in common with Pat Robertson than with reality. To think that the American government is capable of pulling a stunt like 9-11 and keeping it secret is just beyond idiotic. Vidal is a poet: he knows how to use language well and thus he can get people to think he knows what he’s talking about. But he has no appreciation for the complexity of American bureaucracy.
If 9-11 illustrates anything, it’s that American national security is riddled with incompetencies; you conspiracy people seriously lack knowledge about the way the pre-9-11 national security apparatus worked. If you had any understanding of the THOUSANDS of people who would have to be able to keep a really evil secret, and the number of agencies that would have to coordinate to make the thing work, you’d realize your theory is no better than the one that blamed it on the Jews. Both stemmed from the following logic: Bush (Judaism) is evil, the terrorist attacks were evil; therefore Bush (the Jews) carried out the terror attacks.
If you want a realistic and truly insightful Bush critic, Noam Chomsky is your man.
Oh, come. There is a pretty similar deal now with progressives and 9/11 now, as there was them and the JFK assassination (lol, don’t even get me started on JFK[Four words:House Select Committee on Assassinations]).
First of all, Logo, Vidal uses mostly mainstream news sources and not http://www.menwearingtinhats.com. It hardly a conspiracy theory if it’s extensively backed up by mainstream news stories.
Secondly, to address your arguments, the admistration is trying to keep a secret and has been. People in the security sector, moreover, have voiced suspicions. The light is slipping through the cracks (forgive the turgid, dramatic, metaphoric prose, I’m tired and unwell).
edit- I advise you not to click on that tin hats site.
Good post Blu.
slopcraties, I hate to say this but you’re kind of an ass. You really are.
Check out the book, “Philosophy in a Time of Terror” by Borradori. It is based on interviews with Habermas and Derrida just after 9-11. If you want a philosophical reaction to the shock of the incident itself, from a western perspective, you can’t go better than this book. In terms of philosophy post-9-11, it only really affects political philosophy. There is nothing new in any of the opposing ideologies. However, international security is different. Liberals do have to question rights like freedom of association, and sovereignty. I can’t see a new philosophical position arising from this. It might be shocking, but surely not as shocking as WWII?
Dunno, are there any further implications? really?