text abuse
 

"Willi" wrote in message
...

Like many things it is a matter of degree.

It's a lot like addressing points made by your correspondent, then.

You have the "honor" of
making the most frequent personal insults and engaging in the most name
calling of any person posting to ROFF in its history.

Well, wherever someone counts, someone has to come in first, I guess.

I'm guessing that
your volume would be more than ALL other posters combined.

I'm guessing that you're not serious.....or you're badly deluded.....or
you're lying.

But

"Then maybe you can explain to me what it is?"

Maybe.

Lance Morrow once attended a conference called "The Anatomy of Evil",
convened in Oslo by Elie Wiesel. Also in attendance were the likes of
"...Vaclav Havel and Nelson Mandela, Jimmy Carter and Francois Mitterand,
Gunter Grass and Nadine Gordimer, Chai Lang and Li Lu..." etc. He quotes
Havel as saying "Hatred is a diabolical attribute of a fallen angel: it is a
state of the spirit that aspires to be God, that may even think it is God,
and is tormented by the indications that it is not and cannot be." He goes
on to describe a typical hater: "A serious face, a quickness to take
offense, strong language, shouting, the inability to step outside himself
and see his own foolishness."

The first bit is a little florid for my tastes, but he's absolutely right
about all of it.

But wait, you say......that sounds JUST like somebody we all know!

Morrow says, "I would have added, however, that those qualities of a
hater--strength of conviction, seriousness of moral intent, passionate ideas
about right and wrong, clarity of opinion--are indispensable in recognizing
evil and combating it. Evil usually cannot be fought very well by people
with a relaxed and tolerant attitude."*

He's right, too. Well.....mostly.

Twain was right too. :)

Wolfgang
*Evil: An Investigation", Lance Morrow, Basic Books, 2003, p. 194.

text abuse
 

Wolfgang wrote:


Wolfgang
*Evil: An Investigation", Lance Morrow, Basic Books, 2003, p. 194.




Like many things, "evil" is also a matter of degree. If you deal with
all degrees of "evil" using the same "strong language and shouting",
that "strong language and shouting" becomes totally ineffective and
takes on the characteristics of what the "strong language and shouting"
is used against.

Willi

text abuse
 

"Willi" wrote in message
...
Wolfgang wrote:


Wolfgang
*Evil: An Investigation", Lance Morrow, Basic Books, 2003, p. 194.




Like many things, "evil" is also a matter of degree. If you deal with
all degrees of "evil" using the same "strong language and shouting", that
"strong language and shouting" becomes totally ineffective and takes on
the characteristics of what the "strong language and shouting" is used
against.

Maybe. Interesting idea, anyway. Care to try to support it?

Wolfgang

text abuse
 

I hesitate to even open my mouth here, but I've found this conversation
fascinating. I've often wondered about the vitriol so strangely
prevalent in online interactions, particularly some of what I've seen
here in ROFF. So if I may...

Wolfgang, what part of Lance Morrow quotes do you disagree with?
(Sorry if I'm missing the obvious, it's late, and I'm tired.)

best, Tim

PS - one of my very first jobs was as the video editor of a PBS/Billy
Moyers' interview of Elie Wiesel, which I believe grew out of that very
same conference.

text abuse
 

Wolfgang wrote:
"Willi" wrote in message
...

Wolfgang wrote:


Wolfgang
*Evil: An Investigation", Lance Morrow, Basic Books, 2003, p. 194.




Like many things, "evil" is also a matter of degree. If you deal with
all degrees of "evil" using the same "strong language and shouting", that
"strong language and shouting" becomes totally ineffective and takes on
the characteristics of what the "strong language and shouting" is used
against.


Maybe. Interesting idea, anyway. Care to try to support it?

Wolfgang




The first example that comes to mind is:

IMO, physical violence in response to a "great" evil is justified.
However, if you use physical violence for every perceived (or imagined)
evil, no matter how minor, you are the one that becomes evil.

Willi

text abuse
 

wrote in message
oups.com...
I hesitate to even open my mouth here, but I've found this conversation
fascinating. I've often wondered about the vitriol so strangely
prevalent in online interactions, particularly some of what I've seen
here in ROFF. So if I may...

Wolfgang, what part of Lance Morrow quotes do you disagree with?
(Sorry if I'm missing the obvious, it's late, and I'm tired.)

It isn't really that I disagree with any of it so much as I feel that it's
incomplete. While Morrow gives a pretty good outline of some of the
attributes required for the fight against evil, he leaves us totally in the
dark concerning technique.......hence my reference to Mark Twain.

Twain knew that one very good way (perhaps the best way) to deal with the
little avatars of the big evils is to stick pins in them......and watch them
squirm.....and listen to them squeal......and laugh all the while.
:)

best, Tim

PS - one of my very first jobs was as the video editor of a PBS/Billy
Moyers' interview of Elie Wiesel, which I believe grew out of that very
same conference.

Cool. I've never seen that. Will have to find it. Thanks.

Wolfgang
"...to remain silent and indifferent is the greatest sin of all..."

text abuse
 

"Willi" wrote in message
...
Wolfgang wrote:
"Willi" wrote in message
...

Wolfgang wrote:


Wolfgang
*Evil: An Investigation", Lance Morrow, Basic Books, 2003, p. 194.




Like many things, "evil" is also a matter of degree. If you deal with
all degrees of "evil" using the same "strong language and shouting", that
"strong language and shouting" becomes totally ineffective and takes on
the characteristics of what the "strong language and shouting" is used
against.


Maybe. Interesting idea, anyway. Care to try to support it?

Wolfgang


The first example that comes to mind is:

IMO, physical violence in response to a "great" evil is justified.
However, if you use physical violence for every perceived (or imagined)
evil, no matter how minor, you are the one that becomes evil.

So, promises of violence (whether overt or thinly veiled) in return for
petty grievances are at the very least a prelude to evil......right? And
approval and justification or rationalization thereof are on the same
path....ainna?

Wolfgang
who probably deserves it.

text abuse
 

Wolfgang wrote:
"Willi" wrote in message
...

Wolfgang wrote:

"Willi" wrote in message
...


Wolfgang wrote:



Wolfgang
*Evil: An Investigation", Lance Morrow, Basic Books, 2003, p. 194.




Like many things, "evil" is also a matter of degree. If you deal with
all degrees of "evil" using the same "strong language and shouting", that
"strong language and shouting" becomes totally ineffective and takes on
the characteristics of what the "strong language and shouting" is used
against.


Maybe. Interesting idea, anyway. Care to try to support it?

Wolfgang


The first example that comes to mind is:

IMO, physical violence in response to a "great" evil is justified.
However, if you use physical violence for every perceived (or imagined)
evil, no matter how minor, you are the one that becomes evil.


So, promises of violence (whether overt or thinly veiled) in return for
petty grievances are at the very least a prelude to evil......right? And
approval and justification or rationalization thereof are on the same
path....ainna?

Wolfgang
who probably deserves it.




Nice deflection.

Willi

text abuse
 

"Willi" wrote in message
...
Wolfgang wrote:
"Willi" wrote in message
...

Wolfgang wrote:

"Willi" wrote in message
...


Wolfgang wrote:



Wolfgang
*Evil: An Investigation", Lance Morrow, Basic Books, 2003, p. 194.




Like many things, "evil" is also a matter of degree. If you deal with
all degrees of "evil" using the same "strong language and shouting",
that "strong language and shouting" becomes totally ineffective and
takes on the characteristics of what the "strong language and shouting"
is used against.


Maybe. Interesting idea, anyway. Care to try to support it?

Wolfgang


The first example that comes to mind is:

IMO, physical violence in response to a "great" evil is justified.
However, if you use physical violence for every perceived (or imagined)
evil, no matter how minor, you are the one that becomes evil.


So, promises of violence (whether overt or thinly veiled) in return for
petty grievances are at the very least a prelude to evil......right? And
approval and justification or rationalization thereof are on the same
path....ainna?

Wolfgang
who probably deserves it.


Nice deflection.

You decline to address the points I make in discussion.....I take one of
yours head on......and THAT'S a deflection? Not surprisingly.....and
characteristically.....this one was over before it started. Buh bye,
Festus.

Wolfgang

text abuse
 

Wolfgang typed:
"Willi" wrote in message
...
Wolfgang wrote:
"Willi" wrote in message
...
Wolfgang wrote:
"Willi" wrote in message
...
Wolfgang wrote:
*Evil: An Investigation", Lance Morrow, Basic Books, 2003, p.
194.

Like many things, "evil" is also a matter of degree. If you deal
with all degrees of "evil" using the same "strong language and
shouting", that "strong language and shouting" becomes totally
ineffective and takes on the characteristics of what the "strong
language and shouting" is used against.

Maybe. Interesting idea, anyway. Care to try to support it?

The first example that comes to mind is:

IMO, physical violence in response to a "great" evil is justified.
However, if you use physical violence for every perceived (or
imagined) evil, no matter how minor, you are the one that becomes
evil.

So, promises of violence (whether overt or thinly veiled) in return
for petty grievances are at the very least a prelude to
evil......right? And approval and justification or rationalization
thereof are on the same path....ainna?

Nice deflection.

You decline to address the points I make in discussion.....I take one
of yours head on......and THAT'S a deflection? Not
surprisingly.....and characteristically.....this one was over before
it started. Buh bye, Festus.

Damn. The rest of us will never be able to discern if Wolfgang is *really*
evil, or just slipped slightly to the right of line in the sand.
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj/