Post by james on Oct 31, 2005 9:45:17 GMT 4
Like it sounds, when things go wrong they go here.
It is not the final word either by any means if you feel your thread/reply was mistakingly placed here feel free to contact a moderator and we will remedy the situation to the best of our ability, the original reply header is still there
so no problem putting it back just as it was.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
May be edited for obscenity's, but otherwise in their full glory. This thread is locked and read only,
to be updated as need be, by staff.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pakistan's Apology to Bangladesh
« Reply #8 on Oct 27, 2005, 2:50pm »
leon
Junior Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 37
Jay, what part of my statement here, did you not understand.
The only power the offending party has over the victim is in the victim not forgiving.
The soul destroying practice of harboring reproach only brings crippling inner turmoil to the victim, obediently waiting for permission in the form of an apology to rise up only gives the master permission to oppress by proxy indefinitely.
That lead to this reply,
I've finally got around to the problem of Pakistan and Bangladesh and apology.
While there's not much I can contribute (because of lack of knowledge and experience) to a discussion about Pakistan-Bangladesh problems, I’m eager to examine the problem of apologies.
For example some of the questions I have definite ideas and theories about are:
==What‘s the difference between the apology of an individual and the apology of a nation-state?
==Is the comprehensive discussion on apology and forgiveness by Professor Aaron Lazare, Chancellor and Dean, University of Massachusetts Medical School,
the current last word on the question of apology-forgiveness?
==Are “apology” and “forgiveness” on the way to becoming buzz words?
==Is it really possible to apologise for evil actions?
==What relation exists between the "State" and the "Individual".
......And so on.
No point, really, in developing these ideas, unless some people want to discuss them.
Anyone interested?
I'm still shaking my head about that.
The only power the offending party has over the victim is in the victim not forgiving.
The soul destroying practice of harboring reproach only brings crippling inner turmoil to the victim, obediently waiting for permission in the form of an apology to rise up only gives the master permission to oppress by proxy indefinitely.
That is pretty straight forward, there is no problem with Pakistan, Bangladesh, apologies or anything else for that matter.
No point, really, in developing these ideas, unless some people want to discuss them.
Your right there is no point, and then you go on prove you have no point again with your reply to my statement here;
Dark savage times in history have frequently been written upon the indignation of a Culture's self righteous demand for empire. Pakistan is not by any means exclusive in this matter. If you would like to debate that by all means, carry on as the problem of apologies offers no solution other than to further the spin surrounding the issue enabling more tragedy upon humanity.
Leon apparently doesn’t find the problem of apologies important. He notes that a debate about the “dark savage times in history” is fine, but that “the problem of apologies offers no solution....”
Now I’m not very good at debating—probably because I’m not particularly interested in winning points or arguments or defeating an opponent. Maybe it’s a shortcoming on my part, but I’ve always thought debates, arguments, and similar activities were pointless since they proved only one thing: that someone was “superior” to their opponent.
Whereas a discussion may allow one person to converse with another, to exchange ideas, to see where perhaps they might modify their own thinking, where there is a give and take, where there is, or can be, real communication.
In any case, Leon feels that the question of apologies is frivolous and contributes to the tragedies brought upon us. I suspect, however, that there may be a connection between the two problems.
Without going into a lengthy discussion of the psychology of apologies and shame and remorse and forgiveness I’ll simply state that apologies in our society can be very often—and very very often are—simply a social convention to ease the embarrassment of people in certain situations. What happens in deep personal relationships—and in soap operas—is another matter.
So we have the personal relationship and then the social convention—people interacting daily in various social situations. But we seem also to have another kind of relationship: the human being seems to have to interact often enough with that thing called the state, the nation, the dictatorship, or the empire.
The issue that started this discussion is concerned with a State Apology: why Pakistan should apologize. So here then is a possible connection between apology and dark savage times in history. The State is filled with “good citizens” who vote, pay taxes, obey the "laws" of what they consider to be a real entity, The State. The State can send “good citizens” to Iraq, for example, to napalm the “enemy.”
But how real is this entity called The State? Isn’t it true that what really exists is a long line of human beings giving orders—human beings often coerced by others into giving orders—and not orders given by an abstraction called The State? It’s not The State that executes the prisoner but a human being following orders of human beings who followed the order of someone who gave the order.
I suggest that it’s not “Pakistan” that should be named as having brought tragedy and suffering upon “Bangladesh,” but instead those human beings who are “good citizens” of an abstraction denoted by the term “Pakistan.” The “dark savage times” are the result of the actions of otherwise decent human beings who are acting in the name of an abstraction. It seems that we have a longstanding problem here of the psychology of the individual.
I leave this discussion with a question.
Does the “apology” of a head of state really reflect, as described by Professor Lazare, the suffering, the shame, remorse, repentence and so on, of the millions of “good citizens” of that state?
A note: I understand that the word “apology” derives from a Greek word, used more than 2000 years ago. The word was used to describe the reply, the explanation, the defense a defendant made to the charge leveled by the prosecutor in court. It’s possible that the idea of shame, remorse, repentence for one’s “shameful” action arises from the exhortations of the Christian clergy.
I suggest that it’s not “Pakistan” that should be named as having brought tragedy and suffering upon “Bangladesh,”
Among other things, what part of Pakistan is not by any means exclusive in this matter, did you not understand,
and my reply:
You know my mum, eh..
That seems to be the leading statement when the conversation comes around to that,
*@&%$$, collage dropout, leon. thanks for the laugh.. jay, I needed that and for
clarifying my point.
OMG.. I spelled college wrong. MA would be so Proud!!
Again failure to read and understand with your reply
Jay, seriously there is nothing wrong with the search to engage friends and acquaintances in discussion. It is how we all come to understand ourselves and others but, respect and friendship are earned not given.
You would be glad to discuss this any time, why?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pakistan's Apology to Bangladesh
« Reply #9 on Oct 27, 2005, 4:41pm »
jay paulson
Guest
27 Oct
Thank you for your reply, Leon. I'll need a little time to go over your comments.
But I do have a question about your final question. I'm not clear as to the reference you are trying to make with the fourth word from the end of your question--the word "this."
It’s not clear to me (forgive my obtuseness) whether you meant by the word “this” in your question the whole of the post of mine you’re analyzing or one or more of my series of postscripts.
In any case I promise you a reply to your questions as soon as I can get around to it.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pakistan's Apology to Bangladesh
« Reply #10 on Oct 27, 2005, 9:53pm »
leon
Junior Member
**
Jay, seriously there is nothing wrong with the search to engage friends and acquaintances in discussion. It is how we all come to understand ourselves and others but, respect and friendship are earned not given.
You would be glad to discuss this any time, why?
UM.. and my point was
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pakistan's Apology to Bangladesh
« Reply #11 on Oct 28, 2005, 11:17pm »
jay paulson
Guest
28 oct
Leon—
I’m sure that any member or guest reading over the posts on this topic that you and I have exchanged over the past few weeks would wonder if we understood the definition of discusssion. Neither one of us has been really discussing anything about the topic but each of us has been nitpicking and cavilling and asking questions that led nowhere, and of course quoting and requoting comments that have been made and so on and so on.
In regard to your question about my understanding your restatement of Lazare's comment on apology, I can say that I understand perfectly what you said, but didn’t see at the time, and do not see at this time, any need to discuss it.
For my part, I’m still interested in discussing one or another of the problems raised by Anwaar’s article. I listed a number of possiblities in an earlier post. Of course with the dramatic sweep of events in Washington and in the Middle East, peoples’ interests will probably lie elsewhere.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pakistan's Apology to Bangladesh
« Reply #12 on Oct 29, 2005, 1:44am »
leon
Junior Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 37
that's a cheap hack to save face
Truth Exists, Falsehood has to be Invented
You just Invented your way into the Falsehood hall of shame, twice just today.
please the hint of plagiarism and slamming james for improving the site.
james works on building this forum 6 to 8 hours a day. by himself on his own time as a volunteer so you can have a civil place to express yourself, in an eye pleasing, comfortable easy to navigate environment.
I'm sure he could switch the view and options you take for granted. back to default mode for a reality check, none the less we all have to breathe the same air, why dont you become a member it will be easier to track your topics, some of which are just short of brilliant.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
It is not the final word either by any means if you feel your thread/reply was mistakingly placed here feel free to contact a moderator and we will remedy the situation to the best of our ability, the original reply header is still there
so no problem putting it back just as it was.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
May be edited for obscenity's, but otherwise in their full glory. This thread is locked and read only,
to be updated as need be, by staff.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pakistan's Apology to Bangladesh
« Reply #8 on Oct 27, 2005, 2:50pm »
leon
Junior Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 37
Jay, what part of my statement here, did you not understand.
The only power the offending party has over the victim is in the victim not forgiving.
The soul destroying practice of harboring reproach only brings crippling inner turmoil to the victim, obediently waiting for permission in the form of an apology to rise up only gives the master permission to oppress by proxy indefinitely.
That lead to this reply,
jay said:
So many topics! So little time!I've finally got around to the problem of Pakistan and Bangladesh and apology.
While there's not much I can contribute (because of lack of knowledge and experience) to a discussion about Pakistan-Bangladesh problems, I’m eager to examine the problem of apologies.
For example some of the questions I have definite ideas and theories about are:
==What‘s the difference between the apology of an individual and the apology of a nation-state?
==Is the comprehensive discussion on apology and forgiveness by Professor Aaron Lazare, Chancellor and Dean, University of Massachusetts Medical School,
the current last word on the question of apology-forgiveness?
==Are “apology” and “forgiveness” on the way to becoming buzz words?
==Is it really possible to apologise for evil actions?
==What relation exists between the "State" and the "Individual".
......And so on.
No point, really, in developing these ideas, unless some people want to discuss them.
Anyone interested?
I'm still shaking my head about that.
The only power the offending party has over the victim is in the victim not forgiving.
The soul destroying practice of harboring reproach only brings crippling inner turmoil to the victim, obediently waiting for permission in the form of an apology to rise up only gives the master permission to oppress by proxy indefinitely.
That is pretty straight forward, there is no problem with Pakistan, Bangladesh, apologies or anything else for that matter.
No point, really, in developing these ideas, unless some people want to discuss them.
Your right there is no point, and then you go on prove you have no point again with your reply to my statement here;
Dark savage times in history have frequently been written upon the indignation of a Culture's self righteous demand for empire. Pakistan is not by any means exclusive in this matter. If you would like to debate that by all means, carry on as the problem of apologies offers no solution other than to further the spin surrounding the issue enabling more tragedy upon humanity.
jay said:
In my comment of 12 October regarding the above topic I mentioned that I was “eager to examine the problem of apologies” and suggested finally that some people might want to discuss ideas in that area.Leon apparently doesn’t find the problem of apologies important. He notes that a debate about the “dark savage times in history” is fine, but that “the problem of apologies offers no solution....”
Now I’m not very good at debating—probably because I’m not particularly interested in winning points or arguments or defeating an opponent. Maybe it’s a shortcoming on my part, but I’ve always thought debates, arguments, and similar activities were pointless since they proved only one thing: that someone was “superior” to their opponent.
Whereas a discussion may allow one person to converse with another, to exchange ideas, to see where perhaps they might modify their own thinking, where there is a give and take, where there is, or can be, real communication.
In any case, Leon feels that the question of apologies is frivolous and contributes to the tragedies brought upon us. I suspect, however, that there may be a connection between the two problems.
Without going into a lengthy discussion of the psychology of apologies and shame and remorse and forgiveness I’ll simply state that apologies in our society can be very often—and very very often are—simply a social convention to ease the embarrassment of people in certain situations. What happens in deep personal relationships—and in soap operas—is another matter.
So we have the personal relationship and then the social convention—people interacting daily in various social situations. But we seem also to have another kind of relationship: the human being seems to have to interact often enough with that thing called the state, the nation, the dictatorship, or the empire.
The issue that started this discussion is concerned with a State Apology: why Pakistan should apologize. So here then is a possible connection between apology and dark savage times in history. The State is filled with “good citizens” who vote, pay taxes, obey the "laws" of what they consider to be a real entity, The State. The State can send “good citizens” to Iraq, for example, to napalm the “enemy.”
But how real is this entity called The State? Isn’t it true that what really exists is a long line of human beings giving orders—human beings often coerced by others into giving orders—and not orders given by an abstraction called The State? It’s not The State that executes the prisoner but a human being following orders of human beings who followed the order of someone who gave the order.
I suggest that it’s not “Pakistan” that should be named as having brought tragedy and suffering upon “Bangladesh,” but instead those human beings who are “good citizens” of an abstraction denoted by the term “Pakistan.” The “dark savage times” are the result of the actions of otherwise decent human beings who are acting in the name of an abstraction. It seems that we have a longstanding problem here of the psychology of the individual.
I leave this discussion with a question.
Does the “apology” of a head of state really reflect, as described by Professor Lazare, the suffering, the shame, remorse, repentence and so on, of the millions of “good citizens” of that state?
A note: I understand that the word “apology” derives from a Greek word, used more than 2000 years ago. The word was used to describe the reply, the explanation, the defense a defendant made to the charge leveled by the prosecutor in court. It’s possible that the idea of shame, remorse, repentence for one’s “shameful” action arises from the exhortations of the Christian clergy.
I suggest that it’s not “Pakistan” that should be named as having brought tragedy and suffering upon “Bangladesh,”
Among other things, what part of Pakistan is not by any means exclusive in this matter, did you not understand,
Oct 20, 2005, 4:23pm, jay paulson wrote:
It seems that we have a longstanding problem here of the psychology of the individual.
It seems that we have a longstanding problem here of the psychology of the individual.
You know my mum, eh..
That seems to be the leading statement when the conversation comes around to that,
*@&%$$, collage dropout, leon. thanks for the laugh.. jay, I needed that and for
clarifying my point.
OMG.. I spelled college wrong. MA would be so Proud!!
Again failure to read and understand with your reply
Perhaps I’ve offended leon with the sentence about the “psychology of the individual.” Or did it provoke a belly laugh?
In any case maybe I should have clarified that sentence, and made it obvious that I was referring to those decent human beings who during dark savage times “are acting in the name of an abstraction.”
But leon, since we’re talking about the problem of the psychology of the individual I’ll have to let you in on a secret: I have problems in that area, and one of them has to do with my compulsive search to engage my friends and acquaintances in discussion. That’s why I turn up at times on this Discussion Forum.
P. S. There’s really nothing wrong with having psychological problems. Everybody has them these days. And that fact provides outlets for the people who laugh at them, for those who sneer at them or mock them or hate them, for psychiatrists and psychologists –as well as providing outlets for those people who try to have a little compassion and understanding for their sister and brother human beings.
P.P.S.
That P.S. above is not an expression of my opinion. It’s the knowledge I have, based on facts I’ve observed. A famous Sufi once said something to the effect that opinions are based on sand, knowledge is based on solid rock—like the Rock of Gibraltar. This doesn’t mean that I can’t find out other facts to make that knowledge more nearly perfect. (Of course, in the world we inhabit absolute perfection can not be found.)
P.P.P.S.
Glad to discuss this any time.
In any case maybe I should have clarified that sentence, and made it obvious that I was referring to those decent human beings who during dark savage times “are acting in the name of an abstraction.”
But leon, since we’re talking about the problem of the psychology of the individual I’ll have to let you in on a secret: I have problems in that area, and one of them has to do with my compulsive search to engage my friends and acquaintances in discussion. That’s why I turn up at times on this Discussion Forum.
P. S. There’s really nothing wrong with having psychological problems. Everybody has them these days. And that fact provides outlets for the people who laugh at them, for those who sneer at them or mock them or hate them, for psychiatrists and psychologists –as well as providing outlets for those people who try to have a little compassion and understanding for their sister and brother human beings.
P.P.S.
That P.S. above is not an expression of my opinion. It’s the knowledge I have, based on facts I’ve observed. A famous Sufi once said something to the effect that opinions are based on sand, knowledge is based on solid rock—like the Rock of Gibraltar. This doesn’t mean that I can’t find out other facts to make that knowledge more nearly perfect. (Of course, in the world we inhabit absolute perfection can not be found.)
P.P.P.S.
Glad to discuss this any time.
Jay, seriously there is nothing wrong with the search to engage friends and acquaintances in discussion. It is how we all come to understand ourselves and others but, respect and friendship are earned not given.
You would be glad to discuss this any time, why?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pakistan's Apology to Bangladesh
« Reply #9 on Oct 27, 2005, 4:41pm »
jay paulson
Guest
27 Oct
Thank you for your reply, Leon. I'll need a little time to go over your comments.
But I do have a question about your final question. I'm not clear as to the reference you are trying to make with the fourth word from the end of your question--the word "this."
It’s not clear to me (forgive my obtuseness) whether you meant by the word “this” in your question the whole of the post of mine you’re analyzing or one or more of my series of postscripts.
In any case I promise you a reply to your questions as soon as I can get around to it.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pakistan's Apology to Bangladesh
« Reply #10 on Oct 27, 2005, 9:53pm »
leon
Junior Member
**
P. S. There’s really nothing wrong with having psychological problems. Everybody has them these days. And that fact provides outlets for the people who laugh at them, for those who sneer at them or mock them or hate them, for psychiatrists and psychologists –as well as providing outlets for those people who try to have a little compassion and understanding for their sister and brother human beings.
P.P.S.
That P.S. above is not an expression of my opinion. It’s the knowledge I have, based on facts I’ve observed. A famous Sufi once said something to the effect that opinions are based on sand, knowledge is based on solid rock—like the Rock of Gibraltar. This doesn’t mean that I can’t find out other facts to make that knowledge more nearly perfect. (Of course, in the world we inhabit absolute perfection can not be found.)
P.P.P.S.
Glad to discuss this any time.
P.P.S.
That P.S. above is not an expression of my opinion. It’s the knowledge I have, based on facts I’ve observed. A famous Sufi once said something to the effect that opinions are based on sand, knowledge is based on solid rock—like the Rock of Gibraltar. This doesn’t mean that I can’t find out other facts to make that knowledge more nearly perfect. (Of course, in the world we inhabit absolute perfection can not be found.)
P.P.P.S.
Glad to discuss this any time.
Jay, seriously there is nothing wrong with the search to engage friends and acquaintances in discussion. It is how we all come to understand ourselves and others but, respect and friendship are earned not given.
You would be glad to discuss this any time, why?
UM.. and my point was
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pakistan's Apology to Bangladesh
« Reply #11 on Oct 28, 2005, 11:17pm »
jay paulson
Guest
28 oct
Leon—
I’m sure that any member or guest reading over the posts on this topic that you and I have exchanged over the past few weeks would wonder if we understood the definition of discusssion. Neither one of us has been really discussing anything about the topic but each of us has been nitpicking and cavilling and asking questions that led nowhere, and of course quoting and requoting comments that have been made and so on and so on.
In regard to your question about my understanding your restatement of Lazare's comment on apology, I can say that I understand perfectly what you said, but didn’t see at the time, and do not see at this time, any need to discuss it.
For my part, I’m still interested in discussing one or another of the problems raised by Anwaar’s article. I listed a number of possiblities in an earlier post. Of course with the dramatic sweep of events in Washington and in the Middle East, peoples’ interests will probably lie elsewhere.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Re: Pakistan's Apology to Bangladesh
« Reply #12 on Oct 29, 2005, 1:44am »
leon
Junior Member
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 37
that's a cheap hack to save face
Truth Exists, Falsehood has to be Invented
You just Invented your way into the Falsehood hall of shame, twice just today.
please the hint of plagiarism and slamming james for improving the site.
james works on building this forum 6 to 8 hours a day. by himself on his own time as a volunteer so you can have a civil place to express yourself, in an eye pleasing, comfortable easy to navigate environment.
I'm sure he could switch the view and options you take for granted. back to default mode for a reality check, none the less we all have to breathe the same air, why dont you become a member it will be easier to track your topics, some of which are just short of brilliant.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________