Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Sy Borg]

BTW, I am not pro-Israel or pro-Jew. I don't care about them. Neither of them. Anyone involved in a seventy-year war cannot claim to be guiltless. It logically takes two absolute idiots to fight for that long, without ever finding a compromise to improve the situation for both sides.

The history of this issue begins around 800 BCE, as we know, not only seventy years ago. And there are many parties involved, not just two. The ones I can think of are: Israel, Palestine, UN, USA, UK, and lately, Yemen, and other 'Arab' states, very much including Iran. Is it reasonable also to include the EU, Canada, and all the other 'world leaders' who supported and re-echoed President Biden's statement of total support for Israel?

I think it would be difficult to find a compromise acceptable to all, given that there are so many parties involved. This whole matter is punctuated with episodes of military coercion against populations too 'weak' to resist them, beginning with when the Jews were expelled from Palestine in 800 BCE, by an irresistible military force. The result is a big mess, one that defies any simple or easy resolution...

It's difficult alright. Seventy years of it. There only possible "solution" is being played out now, just as it's been played out for the last seven decades.

I say a pox on both their houses. And a pox on the UN's house for turning a blind eye to so many atrocities elsewhere in the world to satisfy its significant anti-semitic contingent. This dereliction of duty is a significant reason why the world is currently so unstable - when the watchdog is busy with small matter, big players operate with relative impunity.

[Lagayascienza]

Clearly, the Palestinians are never going to defeat the Israelis militarily. The West won't allow that. Nor will they ever get their lands back. Israel won't allow that. You say that "the only possible "solution" is being played out now". If that is true, then what is the endgame? What do you think should be done with the Palestinians now?

[Sy Borg]

Lagaya, I don't feel like it's any of our business. Just as I don't feel like South Sudan, Syria, Uyghurs et al are our business. Why adopt some cases and ignore the rest? Myanmar. Iraq. Central African Republic. Republic of Congo ...

The global order has fractured and failed, and is failing ever more. This is a time to pay attention to conditions at home because nations are increasingly on their own. Not even Arab cultures stand up for each other. Consider how the Palestinian leadership cynically threw the Uyghurs under the bus at the scent of that sweet, sweet Chinese funding: https://www.voanews.com/a/palestinian-l ... 50767.html

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas recently visited Beijing, where he met with Chinese leader Xi Jinping and expressed support for China's treatment of Muslim Uyghurs in Xinjiang. His endorsement of China's policies and denial of the mistreatment of Muslims in Xinjiang drew criticism from politicians and rights activists.

During their meeting Wednesday, in which Abbas sought economic aid, he and Xi issued a joint statement in which Abbas endorsed China's domestic and foreign policies while dismissing the human rights concerns in Xinjiang as Western concepts.

The United States and some other countries have designated China's treatment of Uyghurs and other Muslims in Xinjiang as genocide, and the U.N. human rights office has stated that China's actions in Xinjiang may constitute crimes against humanity.

China denies these allegations and considers them fabrications by anti-China forces.

Abbas said in the joint statement that China's actions in Xinjiang have "nothing to do with human rights" and are aimed at countering extremism and terrorism. He also emphasized Palestinian opposition to using the Xinjiang issue to interfere in China's internal affairs.

So nations are on their own. Favours given will be gratefully accepted, but never returned - and maybe not even acknowledged.

It ostensibly seems to be crazy that so many young westerners are marching for Palestine (especially gays and women) instead of marching for their own diminishing life prospects. I suspect there is a strong element of displaced resentment in those rallies, that they are not so much about the war as they are an expression of general dissatisfaction with a capitalist system that has let them down.

[Lagayascienza]

Yes, it's not directly affecting this country so maybe it's none of our business any more than other conflicts elsewhere are any of our business. They would be our business only insofar as they affected us or insofar as we could, and might want to, help if asked. But, if it is true that the only possible "solution" is the one being played out now, then I find that very sad. What has all the sound and fury been about? Over the last seven months, as people here on the forum have been arguing about it vigorously from various POV, tens of thousands have died and millions displaced, the media has been awash with it, the security situation world wide has deteriorated because of it... And all for what? No resolution? No justice? Is all we can hope for just more of the same? If so, then we are a sorry lot.

[Lagayascienza]

Yes, it's not directly affecting this country so maybe it's none of our business any more than other conflicts elsewhere are any of our business. They would be our business only insofar as they affected us or insofar as we could, and might want to, help if asked. But, if it is true that the only possible "solution" is the one being played out now, then I find that very sad. What has all the sound and fury been about? Over the last seven months, as people here on the forum have been arguing about it vigorously from various POV, tens of thousands have died and millions displaced, the media has been awash with it, the security situation world wide has deteriorated because of it... And all for what? No resolution? No justice? Is all we can hope for just more of the same? If so, then we are a sorry lot.

[Lagayascienza]

Sorry for the double post. Not sure what happened.

[Sy Borg]

Yes, it's not directly affecting this country so maybe it's none of our business any more than other conflicts elsewhere are any of our business. They would be our business only insofar as they affected us or insofar as we could, and might want to, help if asked. But, if it is true that the only possible "solution" is the one being played out now, then I find that very sad. What has all the sound and fury been about? Over the last seven months, as people here on the forum have been arguing about it vigorously from various POV, tens of thousands have died and millions displaced, the media has been awash with it, the security situation world wide has deteriorated because of it... And all for what? No resolution? No justice? Is all we can hope for just more of the same? If so, then we are a sorry lot.

We have eight billion people, which has proved to be wildly unsustainable, creating a breakdown in the world order and global economy as we continue into the Holocene extinction event. The situation has made it certain that, in this century (probably sooner than that), there will be major events that will result in greater loss of human life than ever seen before in history.

It's a sad time. While humanity has enjoyed better living standards than ever before, the period of improvement is over for now, and we are in a decline. All nations are struggling. China might seem like its going well but it keeps its problems quiet but there's a lot of despair there as the economy stalls. Record numbers of women are compelled into sex work. The real estate sector is a disaster. The banking sector is in trouble, and there's been a flare-up of social problems, with people behaving in very odd ways https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjj_mkc6b6s

We are not a sorry lot IMO. Far from it. Your expectations are high. We are simians, very similar to chimps. The progress we've made has been extraordinary. However, we are ultimately apes and, like other apes, we have a tendency to do stupid sh1t. Look at history, any country, any culture. Dig beneath the surface PR and you will find a ton of stupid ****. We pretend that we are better than that and we are disappointed when we fail to live up to standards far beyond our capabilities (en masse).

People seem to be easily confused by the fact that individual humans are capable of more sophisticated morality than masses. Once you get a group together, everyone's interests rationalise and the focus will be on money, the one thing almost everyone can agree on. It's why committees don't create great works of art.

As things stand, the killing in Palestine is dwarfed by deaths in other conflicts, such as in South Sudan, where about 400,000 people (approx 40,000 children) have been killed in the conflict in so far. Why are there no street protests, as with Palestine, demanding that something be done about it on humanitarian grounds? The Syrian civil war has resulted in about 300,000 deaths? Why no demonstrations in Ivy League universities? Why has no one started a thread about it?

It's because people appreciate that bad things happen in the world all the time, more than one can process, let alone combat. Somehow Palestine has become a trendy cause, despite being far from special, or even close to the worst humanitarian problem. The only specialness is in the extraordinary obstinacy of both sides over a prolonged period. The tragedy of the commons writ large. If everyone just stopped fighting, everyone would be better off - but they can't stop fighting.

[value]

Experts alarmed over AI in military as Gaza turns into “testing ground” for US-made war robots
https://www.salon.com/2024/03/09/expert ... de-robots/

"Autonomous weapons “inherently dehumanize the people targeted and make it easier to tolerate widespread killing,” which is in violation of international human rights law.

A playground for autonomous AI war robots... A playground where, in the words of Pattern-chaser, people are locked in and imprisoned.

..imprisoning the Palestinian people in the two small enclaves that remain of their country?

Evidence for imprisonment of the people in Gaza:

(2024) Urgent Attention: Israel deprives Gaza of drinking water
Israel is not only bombing the people Gaza but also cuts the population off from access to drinking water.
Source: La Via Campesina | The Guardian | UN expert: Israel must stop using drinking water as a weapon of war

Future of Life Institute
future-life.png (17.01 KiB) Viewed 885 times

Max Tegmark, a professor at MIT and cofounder of the Future of Life Institute, a nonprofit that opposes autonomous weapons, says AI weapons should be “stigmatized and banned like biological weapons.”.

Personally, I have seen what good management can do to fix human culture related problems. An example is a police chief in New York who, when faced with an apparent unfixable situation of police corruption, invented a unique strategy to curb both corruption and crime, and turned the whole story around.

The advocacy of a group of scientists in Scientific American who argued that the war in Iraq could be prevented by solving the extreme water crisis in the country, is another example that good management can turn people into friends, also in the Middle East.

The lack of access to clean drinking water led to widespread public unrest and protests in Iraq, causing the emergence of the Islamic State (IS) and its violent campaign against the government.

In reality, the water infrastructure was intentionally destroyed by NATO while the Iraq government was blamed.

UN specialists today speak of an intentional genocide and a war crime, and an award winning journalist wrote a book titled "Killing The Children of Iraq".

(2021) Intentional genocide: the targeted destruction of Iraq's water systems is a war crime
NATO military forces committed war crimes by depriving civilians of drinking water. The vast majority of the 1.5 million civilian deaths were caused not by the direct impact of bombs but by targeted destruction of water systems.
Source: United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA)
Water under siege in Iraq
https://reliefweb.int/report/iraq/sanct ... q-worth-it

Journalist John Pilger
john-pilger.jpg (32.67 KiB) Viewed 885 times

Children in Iraq
water-crisis.jpg (27.13 KiB) Viewed 884 times

Why wasn't it chosen to help the people in Iraq, instead of choosing to destroy their access to water by which over 1.5 million innocent people would die?

Sy Borg recently wrote the following status quo retro-perspective idea about the Iraq war.

Since the US killed its hegemony with its Iraq escapades, global cooperation and security have diminished.

the Iraq invasion, with many thousands [1.5 million people] dead, trillions wasted and soft power squandered.

A playground for autonomous war robots, by people who have been depriving those 'subjects' from access to drinking water.

And a history of accusation of genocidal strategies. Not just in Iraq, but also in Libya:

(2015) War crime: NATO deliberately destroyed Libya's water infrastructure
The deliberate bombing of Libya's water infrastructure, with the knowledge that doing so would result in massive deaths of the population, is not just a war crime, but a genocidal strategy.
Source: https://theecologist.org/2015/may/14/wa ... astructure

(2021) NATO Killed Civilians in Libya. It's Time to Admit It.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/03/20/na ... -admit-it/

Admit it... Why wasn't it prevented?

If racial hate gets its way, a strive for genocide may be the logical result. What if that strive is built into AI combined with a situation in which, for the higher purpose of that situation (advancement of war technologies), it concerns a pursuit of high efficiency?

I recently read that an Israeli sniper killed a 14 year old girl who stood before a hospital.

Israeli sniper kills Palestinian girl in front of Gaza hospital
https://www.aljazeera.com/program/newsf ... a-hospital

The robots are about to 'the job' more efficient...

[Sy Borg]

Funny how important Palestine is and how unimportant Sudan is.

It must suck to be Sudanese. Over a million of your people are killed and no one cares, not even a little bit. Meanwhile, when thousands of Palestinians die, it's treated like a global disaster.

[value]

I would argue that it is like your example of human's treatments of ants. What matters (philosophically) is not whether one has attention, but the potential when one does. From that perspective, I would argue that Pattern-chaser might be right in how he addressed the subject in the topic.

You mentioned once that you would never hurt an ant when you are consciously aware of them, which I found interesting and beautiful.

The situation may be like humans and ants. If ants are not being invasive, most people don't wish them harm, and will avoid stepping on them (if convenient haha). I sometimes leave out my breadboard for them to finish the fine cleaning work. So we feel benevolently towards them (if they don't sin!) but we ultimately don't care if, say, one ant kills another*.

* Unless the killing is shown in close-up on YouTube, in which case much heartbreak will follow

The potential for human cooperation, friendship and fighting for a shared future (a shared purpose) might be a motive for some people to advocate against war. This might explain that scientists who are involved in international cooperation are often outspoken against war.

(2022) Scientists Against War: A Plea to World Leaders for Better Governance
https://link.springer.com/article/10.10 ... 22-00198-0

Bertrand Russell, a prominent activist against war, once said "the [philosophical] truth is essentially neutral, it is the same for anyone.".

[Sy Borg]

I would argue that it is like your example of human's treatments of 🐜 ants. What matters (philosophically) is not whether one has attention, but the potential when one does. From that perspective, I would argue that Pattern-chaser might be right in how he addressed the subject in the topic.

You mentioned once that you would never hurt an ant when you are consciously aware of them, which I found interesting and beautiful.

The situation may be like humans and ants. If ants are not being invasive, most people don't wish them harm, and will avoid stepping on them (if convenient haha). I sometimes leave out my breadboard for them to finish the fine cleaning work. So we feel benevolently towards them (if they don't sin!) but we ultimately don't care if, say, one ant kills another*.

* Unless the killing is shown in close-up on YouTube, in which case much heartbreak will follow :)

The potential for human cooperation, friendship and fighting for a shared future (a shared purpose) might be a motive for some people to advocate against war. This might explain that scientists who are involved in international cooperation are often outspoken against war.

(2022) Scientists Against War: A Plea to World Leaders for Better Governance
https://link.springer.com/article/10.10 ... 22-00198-0

Bertrand Russell, a prominent activist against war, once said "the [philosophical] truth is essentially neutral, it is the same for anyone.".

There is so much in this world that is problematic. I'd speak out against war except that there's no point. It made sense when there was an American hegemony. If you would get them to moderate their actions, that would impact across the globe. Now there are four of five power player jockying for position in the power vacuum, who do not accept the world order established after WWII, and are looking to undo those borders.

We have not seen even a tenth of what's coming. Israel/Palestine will look like a schoolyard fight by comparison.

[value]

Can you be more specific of how an escalation might occur?

I am reminded of a post by a Chinese philosopher on this forum, that was ignored for years. It was titled Universal values and it concluded with the following.

“A Chinese thinker tells Obama: human hopes are in China, new Chinese ideas will lead the world for thousands of years”，"Without Chinese thoughts, the world will lost”. The oriental universal values "for others, for society, for the world, for all beings" are significantly implanted in its body and manifested in the past history and today. The Oriental universal values are “social morality” in nature, “selfless”, “ interests of all sentient beings, benefit others and the world, and the interests of the heaven and the earth. These are the pursuits of human ideal destination, and human ultimate civilization of the universal values. Chinese civilization will once again become a huge impact on world civilizations!
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=14969

As I have been advocating in this topic, philosophy can be a solution and should be held responsible.

According to an article on the website of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ancient Chinese philosophy holds that "a just cause should be pursued for the common good". The article also notes that the Chinese nation has always held beliefs such as "peace is most precious", "harmony without uniformity", "peace among all nations", and "universal love and non-aggression".

I once noticed a video that showed that people in China were against war, and needed to be convinced to support a certain war by 'an idea of good'.

The idea of good, that is philosophy. It is Levinas his eschatological vision that can secure actual peace.

[Sy Borg]

Can you be more specific of how an escalation might occur?

I am reminded of a post by a Chinese philosopher on this forum, that was ignored for years. It was titled Universal values and it concluded with the following.

“A Chinese thinker tells Obama: human hopes are in China, new Chinese ideas will lead the world for thousands of years”，"Without Chinese thoughts, the world will lost”. The oriental universal values "for others, for society, for the world, for all beings" are significantly implanted in its body and manifested in the past history and today. The Oriental universal values are “social morality” in nature, “selfless”, “ interests of all sentient beings, benefit others and the world, and the interests of the heaven and the earth. These are the pursuits of human ideal destination, and human ultimate civilization of the universal values. Chinese civilization will once again become a huge impact on world civilizations!
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=14969

"Chinese ideas" like morality, selflessness, interests of all sentient beings, benefiting others and the world, and the interests of the heaven and the earth ... splendid ideals, indeed.

Do you think China will ever try adopting those values, or will they continue their trajectory in the opposite direction?

[value]

Chinese philosophers Confucius (the paragon of Chinese sages) and Mencius would have "looked down upon a blatant recklessness toward animals".

Mencius, a prominent philosopher in Chinese history, strongly advocated for pacifism and the prevention of war. He believed in practicing benevolence and righteousness as a way to ascend to political dominance without the need for warfare. Mencius rejected the idea of "righteous" wars in ancient records and emphasized that the benevolent have no enemies under Heaven.

The beautiful comment of chewybrian in a recent topic, shows a similar perspective: We should all be on the same team if we declare we are engaging in philosophy.

I wrote the following in a topic about racist hate, Honesty about Racism:

Intellect and reason is a higher good than hate and revenge. Therefore my argument: philosophy can and should be held responsible.

"Within the context of reason, there is no place for hate and evil."

Kant wrote in "Religion within the Boundaries of Mere Reason,": "pure reason is the faculty of concepts, and concepts are not concerned with the inclinations, but only with the understanding and its object"

Therefore, according to Kant (who authored one of the most profound works on reason), pure reason cannot be the source of hate and evil, which arises from the inclinations and desires of the human will. Kant believed that every human being has the capacity to resist evil and choose the moral path, which is the path of reason.

It is evident that pure philosophy doesn't allow racist hate, not by prohibiting it, but by fundamentally making it irrational, a priori.

More appropriate might be to ask, will humanity choose the intelligible path, e.g. Kant's 'path of reason'? Will humanity join in on 'the same team' for the higher good interest of intellectual progress? It appears to me that such an intention would align with Universal values and that governments would follow suit.

[Sy Borg]

More appropriate might be to ask, will humanity choose the intelligible path, e.g. Kant's 'path of reason'? Will humanity join in on 'the same team' for the higher good interest of intellectual progress? It appears to me that such an intention would align with Universal values and that governments would follow suit.

That's the question. At this stage, the tragedy of the commons is playing out. I suppose it will continue to do so until the tragedies pile up to a critical threshold.