Bin Laden is alive and well

[Cambo]

I think that not being able to understand people's perfectly natural emotions in a time like this is disrespecting their humanity.

I agree, and I understand well enough. I sympathise, even. But some of the reactions I have encountered have saddened me. Wishes that Bin Laden could have been tortured at length in front of the families of 9/11 victims. People hoping he suffered horribly before he died. Bizarrely, one guy hoping the bullets were dipped in pig's blood when they were shot through his skull. A whole heap of people glad that he is now burning in Hell.

These are dehumanising sentiments. It's dehumanising to hate. It's dehumanising to wish agony upon another human being. It's perfectly understandable, and it would be just as discompassionate to condemn those who hate Bin Laden and wish horrible things would happen to him. But these feelings are harming those who hold them. My wish is that once the dust settles, those Bin Laden has harmed will be able to hold peace in thier hearts, free of hatred. This is nothing to do with respect for Bin Laden, who is, after all, dead, and isn't affected if people mourn or reviel him. It's entirely for the benefit of the living.

Personally, I'm not especially joyful he is dead. I'm glad he is no longer harming people, but I think it likely his legacy will continue to cause harm and death. But the truth of it is that here is a man who spent the majority of his life involved in the deaths of others, and now he himself is dead. That doesn't seem like cause for celebration to me. It seems like a waste.

[Vraith]

In one way, Z, it is hard to argue about much of what you said...I actually agree that burial rituals/rites are pointless...in fact the only real, indirectly meaningful thing to do with a corpse is grind them up into good organic fertilizer.
I can even, though I don't agree with some of the displays, personally have a feeling of justice served, mission accomplished...I normally don't favor the death penalty...but there is a qualitative difference between this man and a garden variety murderer, and there is literally no doubt of his responsibility.
But the drawing and quartering, the head on a pike...that says nothing and does nothing about the dead one. But it does say something and do something to the person who gives in to/justifies it. And what it says and does is nothing good.

[Zarathustra]

Well said, Cambo and Vraith. Likewise, I can agree with a lot of your points, too.

I think a lot of people are simply venting. This is a monumental event, saturated with years worth of complex emotions reaching down to our deepest springs of anger, sadness, humiliation, etc. I don't really think people are serious when they suggest the more extreme sentiments. But what we're all feeling defies words and concepts, so some people are stretching to find the most extreme concepts possible to express these things. If you gave them the torture impliment to torture Bin Laden himself, I'm sure a lot of them would finally recognize some of the points you're making, and wouldn't have the stomach for it. But then again there are likely some who would relish the act. You could call them monsters. On the other hand, they might feel you have lost something crucial about your humanity, for not feeling the same anger they feel.

This event happened during a particularly trying time for my own family, so it's hard for me to separate personal tragedy from this public event. I'm kind of in a state of shock right now. I hope I haven't offended anyone with my venting.

[Vraith]

But then again there are likely some who would relish the act. You could call them monsters. On the other hand, they might feel you have lost something crucial about your humanity, for not feeling the same anger they feel.

This event happened during a particularly trying time for my own family, so it's hard for me to separate personal tragedy from this public event. I'm kind of in a state of shock right now. I hope I haven't offended anyone with my venting.

Well, on the last, I don't think I've ever been personally offended [as in "if I ever met that person I'd slap em silly" offended] by anything here...any offense is more theoretical and/or vicarious.

But, in this, not even that. Anger and I have a long-standing and intimate relationship. It really isn't the feeling I'm arguing against. It's the step from the feeling to particular kinds of actions. The feeling is, at best, only semi-rational, semi-controllable. The move to actions is another thing entirely, with numerous factors in it. One of which is [related to what you said about torturing OBL, and believe it or not, I'm gonna roughly quote Terry Pratchett]
"If you'll do something for a good reason, you could do it for a bad one."
That sounds like a "slippery slope" argument, but in this case it's backed up by tons of social/psychological evidence...there really is a slope, it really is slippery.

[Tjol]

I think that not being able to understand people's perfectly natural emotions in a time like this is disrespecting their humanity.

I agree, and I understand well enough. I sympathise, even. But some of the reactions I have encountered have saddened me. Wishes that Bin Laden could have been tortured at length in front of the families of 9/11 victims. People hoping he suffered horribly before he died. Bizarrely, one guy hoping the bullets were dipped in pig's blood when they were shot through his skull. A whole heap of people glad that he is now burning in Hell.

These are dehumanising sentiments. It's dehumanising to hate. It's dehumanising to wish agony upon another human being. It's perfectly understandable, and it would be just as discompassionate to condemn those who hate Bin Laden and wish horrible things would happen to him. But these feelings are harming those who hold them. My wish is that once the dust settles, those Bin Laden has harmed will be able to hold peace in thier hearts, free of hatred. This is nothing to do with respect for Bin Laden, who is, after all, dead, and isn't affected if people mourn or reviel him. It's entirely for the benefit of the living.

If it is dehumanising to hate... the OBL was clearly not human. Hyperbole can get you into all sorts of trouble when it comes to semantics.

Personally, I'm not especially joyful he is dead. I'm glad he is no longer harming people, but I think it likely his legacy will continue to cause harm and death. But the truth of it is that here is a man who spent the majority of his life involved in the deaths of others, and now he himself is dead. That doesn't seem like cause for celebration to me. It seems like a waste.

Waste isn't the right word. OBL was productive in his way of being productive. That he can no longer be productive in conducting murder and torture is something to be joyful about, regardless of the conflicts it creates within your personal code of ethics. You know it is worth being joyful about, but you've also made the mistake of thinking that all deaths are equally tragic, when truth is that they are not. Everything exists within a context, everything happens within a context, and the context is as much a part of the definition of an action as the nature of the action itself.

[Tjol]

Such treatment of a corpse isn't only an insult to Islam, it's an insult to human beings in general.

Agreed. Find all this posturing faintly distasteful myself. Congrats, he's apparently dead. Vengeance is yours. It's not bringing anybody back.
--A

100% agreed. Tjol's attitude might as well make him the posterboy for drumming up anti-US feeling.

Tjol, it's hard to see how your opinions differ that much from those that you execrate. Presumably, in Bin Laden's death, a blow has been struck against a great Satan... sounds familiar, anyone? Mindless jingoism at its most toe-curlingly disturbing.

Equivocation is for people who cannot grasp the true complexity of things. If you mean to equivocate me and OBL, it is only because you aim to be simple minded. If you were interested in the truth, then you would know just how absurd your equivocation is.

In column A: me, a handful of fights in jr high school, high school participation in contact sports, no threat or attempt at murder. In column B: OBL, instructor, consultant, planner for the murder of thousands and possibly tens of thousands. instructor, consultant and planner of the torture and sadistic beheadings of non-muslims.

OBL would call me with Satan because I do not do the evil that OBL instructed his followers to participate in. I call OBL with Satan because of the evil OBL instructed his followers to participate in. Polar opposites, but don't let me get in the way of your simple minded equivocation.

[Tjol]

p.s. My point isn't that I need to see OBL's remains disrespected. My point is that I don't understand why it's important that we respect OBL's remains, given that neither we nor, supposedly, the majority of Muslims have any respect for OBL.

If the best reason you can give that we should respect OBL's remains is that it is tabboo to even suggest we do anything otherwise, you'll find that I'm not convinced by that argument.

What has OBL done to warrant respect from us, even at his burial?

Now, if you'll come out and admit that we're worried that a large number of muslims see OBL as someone they identify with, then you've come to my other point, that the political correctness needs to be dropped. If OBL is someone that many muslims revere, it must be admitted.

[[Syl]]

Equivocation is for people who cannot grasp the true complexity of things. If you mean to equivocate me and OBL...

You keep using that word. I do not think that it means what you think it means. For instance, changing the meaning of "animal" from 'showing barbaric or uncivilized behavior' to 'living creature of the animal kingdom' is equivocal. I believe you're referring to "false equivalency."

[Tjol]

Equivocation is for people who cannot grasp the true complexity of things. If you mean to equivocate me and OBL...

You keep using that word. I do not think that it means what you think it means. For instance, changing the meaning of "animal" from 'showing barbaric or uncivilized behavior' to 'living creature of the animal kingdom' is equivocal. I believe you're referring to "false equivalency."

Interesting point. From my point of view it would be a false equivocation, but from the person doing the equivocating, they would think they are making an accurate equivocation. So what's the best way to describe an equivocation that I find false, but that the presentor believes is accurate? Do I refer to their point of view or mine?

edit: I also see what you're referring to with the words equivocate and equivalent. Equivocate is to say one and the other are interchangeable, where as equivalent suggests two things are of equal value. It's the difference between saying someone is as bold as a lion or saying that they are bold like a lion.

I'm not seeing someone saying that I am 'like' something, but of a different degree perhaps. I'm seeing someone saying I am interchangeable with the thing I'm being compared to.

edit 2: Or to carry it further, equivalents admit to the complexity of things, equivocation tries to oversimplify. Rhetoric rarely uses the former, and often uses the latter.

[[Syl]]

All equivocation is false or, at least, fallacious (now, you could argue that all human communication is equivocal to one degree or another, but that would be pure sophistry). There's a word for what you're describing on the tip of my tongue, but my wife just called and I have to rush off for margaritas. Wikipedia used to have a pretty good rundown of fallacies, but even if it is such, the last time I checked it was edited to hell and fairly useless.

[Vraith]

edit 2: Or to carry it further, equivalents admit to the complexity of things, equivocation tries to oversimplify. Rhetoric rarely uses the former, and often uses the latter.

You are correct in your conclusion about rhetoric, if you mean it by this definition :

Language that is elaborate, pretentious, insincere, or intellectually vacuous

But equivalent and equivocation are much more simply/starkly different than you suggest. Saying something is equivalent defines a relationship/answer, equivocation is exactly to avoid defining a relationship/answer.

[Cambo]

If it is dehumanising to hate... the OBL was clearly not human. Hyperbole can get you into all sorts of trouble when it comes to semantics.

I certainly think OBL was lacking in some things most of humanity generally considers essential- but does "dehumanising" necessarily mean "making one non-human?" If so, I retract my use of that word. I was using it to indicate that hate robs people of some of the best qualities of humanity- rationality and compassion would be top on the list.

Waste isn't the right word. OBL was productive in his way of being productive. That he can no longer be productive in conducting murder and torture is something to be joyful about, regardless of the conflicts it creates within your personal code of ethics. You know it is worth being joyful about, but you've also made the mistake of thinking that all deaths are equally tragic, when truth is that they are not. Everything exists within a context, everything happens within a context, and the context is as much a part of the definition of an action as the nature of the action itself.

I'd first like to point out that I offered others the respect of sympathising with their emotive reactions- even those that saddened me, liek calls for torture. Given that, I really shouldn't have to defend my own emotive reaction. But, nevertheless:

That he can no longer produce murder and torture is something I am satisfied about. I'm not joyful, and I don't "know" any such thing. I don't think all deaths are equally tragic, and it's not OBL's death that I think was the waste; it was his life. He wasn't born the man he became. That he made the choices he did, and spent the majority of his life murdering people, is a waste. Not only a tragic waste of all the people he killed, but a waste of a lifetime that could have been spent doing something of benefit to humanity. Even though you might say he "produced" in his own way, producing something worse than useless is a waste as well.

[Ur Dead]

As the old ST:TOS series went..

He's dead Jim.....

[Avatar]

My point is that I don't understand why it's important that we respect OBL's remains, given that neither we nor, supposedly, the majority of Muslims have any respect for OBL.

It's not important for him. But it might be important for us. (Is what I think Cambo is getting at.)

Are we "better" than people who torture and murder or not?

--A

[Tjol]

Syl--

You're right, that word does not mean what I think it means. When I checked the dictionary, as soon as I saw the definition, all of the sudden I was left trying to figure out why I'd used that word for the meaning I did, as I've heard the correct use of the word equivocate many times before.

Maybe equate is a better word?

[Tjol]

My point is that I don't understand why it's important that we respect OBL's remains, given that neither we nor, supposedly, the majority of Muslims have any respect for OBL.

It's not important for him. But it might be important for us. (Is what I think Cambo is getting at.)

Are we "better" than people who torture and murder or not?

--A

I don't think it's torture to desecrate a dead body. Sure it makes us squeemish, but disrespecting OBL's corpse isn't half as terrible as sawing a living person's head off. Did OBL deserve a respectful burial? I certianly didn't need him to have a respectful burial.

[Avatar]

You didn't need him to. But maybe the US, or even the world, needed him to.

(Of course it's not torture to "desecrate" a corpse. Hell, personally, I don't think you can desecrate a corpse, any more than you can desecrate a side of beef. That's not the point though.

Those funerary rites/whatever that Z was talking about (here or elsewhere, anybody else find these threads confusing?) exist for a reason.

However pointless they are, they're entrenched in our sense of morality, of humanity, of basic decency. Whether they matter or not in any "real" sense is not important. But in a practical sense they do.)

--A

[Tjol]

You didn't need him to. But maybe the US, or even the world, needed him to.

(Of course it's not torture to "desecrate" a corpse. Hell, personally, I don't think you can desecrate a corpse, any more than you can desecrate a side of beef. That's not the point though.

Those funerary rites/whatever that Z was talking about (here or elsewhere, anybody else find these threads confusing?) exist for a reason.

However pointless they are, they're entrenched in our sense of morality, of humanity, of basic decency. Whether they matter or not in any "real" sense is not important. But in a practical sense they do.)

--A

How entrenched are they? Did OBL observe funeral rights each time he or his followers sawed off a 'heathen' head?

We aren't all the same, and if actions have consequences, we cannot treat everyone the same. OBL's actions in life lead me not to associate him with being human. Sure he has the dna, but he no longer possesses the things that warrant respect, dignity, or otherwise.

It isn't because he is on the other side, it's because of what he has done. I guess that would be the answer to the claims of jingoism before.

[Avatar]

All I'm hearing is "they did something bad, so we should do something bad back to them."

--A

[Orlion]

All I'm hearing is "they did something bad, so we should do something bad back to them."

--A

Yeah!

Can't wait until Bin Laden becomes a symbol like Che... or, dare I say, Geronimo?