Who is more pernicious... wily thugs or corrupt judiciary & venal law "enforcement"?

[bruto]

Who do you think is more pernicious... a traitorous Captain... or an enemy soldier?






.

It seems that this thread is rapidly degenerating and becoming about the validity of the poll itself. I'm about ready to call it a day.

Context makes a little difference. Pernicious to whom? Traitorous in what way? Doing what?

This traitorous captain sells out his platoon for a bribe. That traitorous captain saves his platoon from marching into the valley of death an hour before the armistice is signed. Or fill in blank.

This enemy soldier is a draftee just going about his business. That enemy soldier is a sadistic genocidal rapist.

This scenario has the captain fighting to liberate the concentration camps. That scenario has the captain invading Ukraine.

Not all refusals to answer a context-free question can be overcome by asking another one.

Have fun, folks.

e.t.a. I see once again during my slow typing, Thermal has snuck up the nightingale stair. Oh well, I think the point is made.

 

[Myriad]

Who do you think is more pernicious... a traitorous Captain... or an enemy soldier?

What did each of them do?

 

[Leumas]

It seems that this thread is rapidly degenerating and becoming about the validity of the poll itself. I'm about ready to call it a day.

Context makes a little difference. Pernicious to whom? Traitorous in what way? Doing what?

This traitorous captain sells out his platoon for a bribe. That traitorous captain saves his platoon from marching into the valley of death an hour before the armistice is signed. Or fill in blank.

This enemy soldier is a draftee just going about his business. That enemy soldier is a sadistic genocidal rapist.

This scenario has the captain fighting to liberate the concentration camps. That scenario has the captain invading Ukraine.

Not all refusals to answer a context-free question can be overcome by asking another one.

Nice stories.... cool stuff... unfortunately it is all nothing but an illogic fallacy of avoiding the issue.

Here is a story with a full context and the blanks filled in... perhaps its issue you can hopefully easily answer...

A boy called Bart is bullied at school by a gang of thuggish brutes and despite the teachers seeing this bullying occurring they do nothing to stop it and some of them even giggle and snigger at the bullying.

Bart eventually cannot stop himself from punching the honcho brute and breaking his thuggish snout.

The same teachers who watched the bullying and did nothing... now come scurrying on the double to castigate Bart and suspend him from school...

However... they do nothing to the cackle of thuggish brutes... or their alpha thug whose father happens to be one of the major donors to the school and the owner of the tennis and golf clubs the teachers are members in.

The rout of brutes are further incentivized by the consequences of their thuggery, and when Bart returns to school the scourge of brutes resume their thuggery... again with the teachers watching and again making fun of Bart and again doing nothing.

Poor Bart again thumps one of the brutes and again the venal teachers scamper to the aid of the bunch of thuggish brutes.

This carries on repeatedly with the barrel of brutes being aided and abetted by the venal teachers.
​

Nice story... huh Bruto... is the context specific and detailed enough and are all the blanks filled in for you to not avoid the following question??

Who is more despicable and pernicious in the above story.... the venal teachers.... the thuggish brutes... or perhaps the rich father who owns the corrupted teachers??​

Now... if you do manage to not avoid the issue above.... compare the

thuggish school brutes to the thugs in the OP​

and compare the

venal bought school teachers, to the corrupt venal law enforcement of the OP​

Now can you decide which of the 5 options of the OP's poll you would choose??

...Have fun, folks...

Yes... it certainly is fun reading all the stories in your comment all in fallacious avoidance of the issue... I hope you enjoyed my story enough to help make your choice between the 5 options in the Op's poll.

.... Oh well, I think the point is made.

If by the point you mean a demonstration of how to fallaciously avoid answering the issue... then yes... it is well made indeed!!!

...
There is intersectionality and overlap between them, but the poll question and it's elaborations remain basically unanswerable. None of the choices are clear y/n. They are too vague.

What did each of them do?

ditto as in the response to Bruto above... can you answer the questions there?




.

 

[Foster Zygote]

But suppose we were there, and what we saw was Bart getting more and more upset because no one would concede that his fan fiction was the coolest thing they'd ever read, until he angrily picked up a chunk of pine mulch from the playground and threw it at another kid. And then a teacher walked up and said that even though Bart's projectile missed its target, he'd still violated the school rules and had to go sit in the corner for ten minutes. Later, at lunch, Bart started talking about being bullied, and about how he'd taken out multiple assailants Bruce Lee style in a clear case of self defense, only to be ganged up on by the mustache twirling teachers who were in league with the pernicious Forces of Evil® all along. And then the gods showed up and capriciously damned everyone* to AAH because the Forces of Evil® are a bunch of cupcakes compared to those devourers of worlds.

*Except Myriad. Even Cthulhu would give him a pat on the head and an ice cream and send him to the movies while he ended the rest of the world.

 

[Thermal]

Lots of unneccesary detail in there, but yet again, the important stuff is still missing.

1. What is the bullying? What are the boys doing? Are they mildly teasing our intrepid Bart because Bart is an insufferably rude boy who is oblivious to how he treats others?

2.Are the teachers being reasonable here, because there is no actual bullying going on, but Bart is an obnoxious little princess who has been initiating and perpetuating the conflict?

3. Is Bart resorting to physical violence the appropriate response? Teachers may have a responsibility to help safeguard their students against physical attack by another student, but have little or no responsibility to stop a bullying brat from being lightly teased in return.

4. How reliable is this version anyway? It seems to focus on the POV of this spoiled little punk Bart and begs the question that he is justified in his physical assault. It also assumed that the teachers are influenced by the Alpha's father, which is not a given.

Can you give an example without so much bias, so readers can figure out what you are asking? The details you added do not clear up the main issues.

 

[Craig4]

What did each of them do?

That's enough out of you! No bringing questions of scale into it. Don't you know all questions must be answered in absolutes?!!! Take your nuance and shove right off.

 

[Leumas]

Lots of unneccesary detail in there, but yet again, the important stuff is still missing.

So the OP has too little information for your liking .... and you make up your own added bits....

And when I add extra information... it is again not to your liking because it is too much information that is not what you want.

And then you proceed to add your own imaginative additions to formulate excuses for blaming the victim of the bullying thugs for making the craven brutes do their bullying.... wow!!!

Can you give an example without so much bias, so readers can figure out what you are asking? The details you added do not clear up the main issues.

OK... here you go... but you might not like it.

1. What is the bullying? What are the boys doing? Are they mildly teasing our intrepid Bart because Bart is an insufferably rude boy who is oblivious to how he treats others?

Excellent blaming the victim excuses... wow...


But no... Bart with his superior intellect and knowledge in the school subjects, forces the dullard hot-headed brutish juvenile-worms to have to face their own inadequacies and benightedness and inability to learn the school topics they are dunces in.

So instead of trying to improve and learn more... they... for the juvenile-delinquent hot-headed craven brutes they are, prefer to do what all monkeys do... bully.

This is a fact well known by anyone with the slightest bit or rationality and understanding of psychology and sociology and anthropology and tribalism and cronyism and human thuggery and zoology.

2.Are the teachers being reasonable here, because there is no actual bullying going on, but Bart is an obnoxious little princess who has been initiating and perpetuating the conflict?

<snip further imaginative victim blaming rationalizations>

Hahaha.... Ok... nice added details that YOU want in order to rationalize victim blaming...

But... no... you missed a detail about the story... the craven bullies themselves admitted that they were bullying Bart because he is too intelligent for their liking, and even said they will keep doing it despite Bart actually asking them to stop... even the venal teachers admitted the bullying despite being too afraid and cowardly to do anything about it and some of them even participating in deriding the superior intellect of poor Bart.... all so as to not incur the wrath of the rich father of the honcho thuggish bully and risk losing the donations and tennis club memberships.

So... how is this detail... is it enough

... example without so much bias, so readers can figure out what you are asking?

Can you now figure out enough to decide which of the 5 options of the Poll to select, or have you already done so???

<snip imaginative victim blaming rationalizations>

Ditto... as above.

 

[Foster Zygote]

But let's say, hypothetically, that Bart isn't a child at school, but an adult patronizing a private social club where people gather to discuss a variety of subjects, and where each member is fully aware of the rules of conduct, which are administered by other adult members. In this case, Bart isn't an innocent child attending an educational institution without free choice. He has the ability to walk out any time he likes if he isn't happy with the behavior or responses of the other patrons. There are numerous other social clubs he could attend just as easily as the one in question. But Bart continues to attend, repeatedly starting discussions about things that he knows will attract the disagreement of others, and doing so in a pompous manner crafted to condescend to anyone who doesn't affirm everything he says. He complains vociferously about how badly he thinks he's treated in a private club that he is free to leave for better pastures any time he likes. In that hypothetical situation, would it be fair to say that Bart is there because he likes to play the victim, and that he's doing everything he can to create the situations he claims to detest so much?

 

[MRC_Hans]

So the OP has too little information for your liking .... and you make up your own added bits....

And when I add extra information... it is again not to your liking because it is too much information that is not what you want.

And then you proceed to add your own imaginative additions to formulate excuses for blaming the victim of the bullying thugs for making the craven brutes do their bullying.... wow!!!





OK... here you go... but you might not like it.





Excellent blaming the victim excuses... wow...


But no... Bart with his superior intellect and knowledge in the school subjects, forces the dullard hot-headed brutish juvenile-worms to have to face their own inadequacies and benightedness and inability to learn the school topics they are dunces in.

So instead of trying to improve and learn more... they... for the juvenile-delinquent hot-headed craven brutes they are, prefer to do what all monkeys do... bully.

This is a fact well known by anyone with the slightest bit or rationality and understanding of psychology and sociology and anthropology and tribalism and cronyism and human thuggery and zoology.





Hahaha.... Ok... nice added details that YOU want in order to rationalize victim blaming...

But... no... you missed a detail about the story... the craven bullies themselves admitted that they were bullying Bart because he is too intelligent for their liking, and even said they will keep doing it despite Bart actually asking them to stop... even the venal teachers admitted the bullying despite being too afraid and cowardly to do anything about it and some of them even participating in deriding the superior intellect of poor Bart.... all so as to not incur the wrath of the rich father of the honcho thuggish bully and risk losing the donations and tennis club memberships.

So... how is this detail... is it enough




Can you now figure out enough to decide which of the 5 options of the Poll to select, or have you already done so???






Ditto... as above.

So now the vote is about some specific, yet imaginary, example? While this makes it perhaps easier to vote, it also makes it correspondingly less interesting.

... I get the impression that you are mainly trying to pick a fight.

Hans

 

[Thermal]

So the OP has too little information for your liking .... and you make up your own added bits....

And when I add extra information... it is again not to your liking because it is too much information that is not what you want.

And then you proceed to add your own imaginative additions to formulate excuses for blaming the victim of the bullying thugs for making the craven brutes do their bullying.... wow!!!

r/SelfAwareWolves. You are sooooooo close to getting it.

OK... here you go... but you might not like it.

Excellent blaming the victim excuses... wow...

But no... Bart with his superior intellect and knowledge in the school subjects, forces the dullard hot-headed brutish juvenile-worms to have to face their own inadequacies and benightedness and inability to learn the school topics they are dunces in.

So instead of trying to improve and learn more... they... for the juvenile-delinquent hot-headed craven brutes they are, prefer to do what all monkeys do... bully.

This is a fact well known by anyone with the slightest bit or rationality and understanding of psychology and sociology and anthropology and tribalism and cronyism and human thuggery and zoology.

You still do not answer the basic question posed by myself and others. What exactly are the alleged bullies doing?

See, some posters *insert eyelash fluttering* consider any postings which are not kissing their derriere to be bullying. Thin skinned bunch, I know.

So I will ask yet again: what exactly are the alleged bullies actually doing?

Hahaha.... Ok... nice added details that YOU want in order to rationalize victim blaming...

So far, you have only described the boys being violently assaulted by Bart. It seems that Bart is the only bully in the story so far, as you recount it.

I mean, did one of the boys call Bart brother or babe or something, so Bart lost control and broke his nose? Bart would totally be the psychopath, there.

But... no... you missed a detail about the story... the craven bullies themselves admitted that they were bullying Bart because he is too intelligent for their liking, and even said they will keep doing it despite Bart actually asking them to stop... even the venal teachers admitted the bullying despite being too afraid and cowardly to do anything about it and some of them even participating in deriding the superior intellect of poor Bart.... all so as to not incur the wrath of the rich father of the honcho thuggish bully and risk losing the donations and tennis club memberships.

I didn't miss anything. None of that was in your version. You just made it up now.

So... how is this detail... is it enough

You still refuse to answer the basic clarifications requested, so no.

Can you now figure out enough to decide which of the 5 options of the Poll to select, or have you already done so???

I have no intention of responding to the poll,at least till it is borderline meaningful. As is, it is heavily biased and trying to transparently lead the poll responder to vote for the venal whatevers, and presumably to draw some silly false conclusion, which I have no interest in.

Ask a stupid question, brah, and get a stupid answer.

 

[Leumas]

... in a private club ...

You can make up all the stories you wish of course in order to avoid the issue of the OP... that is an interesting take.... but the whole school parable (in post #44) was a metaphor to make it easier (as repeatedly requested and here and here and here and here) to understand the corruption and venality of law enforcers who let thugs get away with their thuggery.


Accordingly... your inventive story bears no relation to the OP.... since a public school is not a private club... despite of course the alpha hot headed thug whose wealthy father owns the venal teachers and the school... along with his craven cackle of brutish juvenile delinquent worms, feeling it is their private playground.




.

 

[sackett]

Let's suppose that Bart's snootily hyphenated last name is Dunning-Krueger. Let's imagine him as a blustering know-it-all, loudly blathering whatever his vocal chords release and believing every bit of it, prefacing and concluding his blasts with, "Muh, you dunno NUTHEN!" followed often by, "I know more'n ALLA YOUSE! Bluh!"

How long will others remain patient with him? How long is enough? How will Bart react to contradiction, to exasperation, to (I must ask) lampoonery?

 

[Leumas]

Let's suppose that Bart's snootily hyphenated last name is Dunning-Krueger. Let's imagine him as a blustering know-it-all, loudly blathering whatever his vocal chords release and believing every bit of it, prefacing and concluding his blasts with, "Muh, you dunno NUTHEN!" followed often by, "I know more'n ALLA YOUSE! Bluh!"

How long will others remain patient with him? How long is enough? How will Bart react to contradiction, to exasperation, to (I must ask) lampoonery?

So... from the above it can be concluded that you would favor option #3 in the Op's poll if you were to bother to vote???


ETA: Professor David Dunning and Professor Justin Kruger were two scientists.

 

[MRC_Hans]

So... from the above it can be concluded that you would favor option #3 in the Op's poll if you were to bother to vote???


ETA: Professor David Dunning and Professor Justin Kruger were two scientists.

Yes, they are well-known here. So is the syndrome named after them.

Hans

 

[Foster Zygote]

.Accordingly... your inventive story bears no relation to the OP.... since a public school is not a private club...

You're right, of course. This Bart character is clearly an immature child struggling to relate to, and occasionally being disciplined by, adults.

 

[bruto]

I probably should not but cannot resist trying, one last time, to make my position (and I think that of some others) clear.

The initial poll asks for a judgment on very broad, theoretical and non-specific terms.

I maintain that the choices provided in the poll make it impossible to answer honestly, because, even though general principles are a factor, the answer will vary, depending on individual circumstances and context.

This is not a complaint that the questions are not sufficiently detailed. Since the questions regard overall principles they cannot be. It is a complaint that the questions cannot be answered in a way that is valid for all instances.

The response is to provide a specific and detailed instance, but the judgment then demanded is not for that instance but for the original poll, whose generality has not changed, and which remains impossible to answer in what I would consider a way that is not inappropriately absolute and doctrinaire.

And so round and round we go again. The particular is a subset of the general. Not the other way around.

I maintain that, even though I would tend to agree with the original poster's opinion on the particular events and crimes he uses as examples, and might even go so far as to say I would usually expect to agree with the principles they illustrate, the poll as it stands cannot be answered honestly by anyone who is not locked into a doctrinaire and absolute viewpoint that discounts the ambiguity and complexity of human affairs.

And thus, if the discussion requires a presumption that the poll is adequately meaningful, it will never result in anything worth while.

 

[Leumas]

You're right, of course. This Bart character is clearly an immature child struggling to relate to, and occasionally being disciplined by, adults.

So from the above you would be voting option #3 from the OP's poll... right???

 

[Foster Zygote]

Yes, they are well-known here. So is the syndrome named after them.

Hans

Could you be more specific? Perhaps like this?

Yes, they are well-known here. So is the syndrome named after them.

Hans

 

[Leumas]

Yes, they are well-known here. So is the syndrome named after them.

Ok... Hans... so I still cannot tell which option you would vote for from the OP's poll... I am intrigued... if I were to guess I would bet on option #4... do I win the bet?

 

[Leumas]

I probably should not but cannot resist trying, one last time, to make my position (and I think that of some others) clear.

The initial poll asks for a judgment on very broad, theoretical and non-specific terms.

I maintain that the choices provided in the poll make it impossible to answer honestly....

So your option from the OP's poll would be #5 then... right???