Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Frumple]

Basically yes, except it goes in your ear!

[BFEL]

There's no justice in violence, LS. Justice requires reparation. Repayment, some form of correction or renumeration for a wrong. A payment towards restoring a net balance of good. Violence is at best unconnected to that, and all too often precludes it entirely. And a payment of flesh is only payment if it's being fed to someone, generally. It's definitely much quicker than justice ever is, though.

Well this exploded while I wasn't watching it. Of course my sads was ignored, but the debate turned into a wildfire
Eh, this part hasn't been addressed yet, so lets rip Frumple up.

"Justice" is a ridiculous concept born of people in power saying that what they consider good to be the only solution.

The problem with "restoring a net balance of good" is that you first have to DEFINE "good" and the definition you choose could very well be an utterly horrible concept to someone else. "Justice" is a system wherein the people who define this "good" are whoever has the most power, something I shouldn't have to explain as being a bad idea.

Violence DOES preclude that, and I think that is absolutely wonderful. Because ANYONE can be violent. ANYONE can define their own "good" with violence.
Better yet, others can then be violent to THEM. Its a self-balancing system.

Oh and whoever separated animal and human violence, don't.
Humans ARE animals. Otherwise we would be plants. DO I LOOK LIKE I HAVE PHOTOSYNTHESIS?

[GiglameshDespair]

We could be fungus instead.

[Frumple]

Well this exploded while I wasn't watching it. Of course my sads was ignored, but the debate turned into a wildfire

It kinda' didn't. Discussion moved past it pretty quickly, and it was a good 6-7 hours ago since anything was said on the subject. That said...

Violence DOES preclude that, and I think that is absolutely wonderful. Because ANYONE can be violent. ANYONE can define their own "good" with violence.
Better yet, others can then be violent to THEM. Its a self-balancing system.

... violence can't define a good. It can't really "define" anything, because it's inherently and immutable deconstructive. It's breaking things, not making them. At best, it's things that need to be broken (and occasionally, that need legitimately exists), but you cannot create through violence, only (at best) through what comes after it. Confusion over that is one of the reasons the states' justice system is so bloody buggered -- punishment is seen as a goal in itself.

And no, what construes the good is a separate issue from th'fact that violence cannot contribute to it. The issue with violence and justice, whatever justice is defined as, is that violence removes the possibility of action (possibly action that is precluding other, positive, action, yes, but again, the violent act itself is negative). Regardless of what justice is seen to be, violent action cannot contribute to it. It's pretty much literally impossible. You cannot create via destruction. You can break something and then rearrange it into something else, but it's the act of rearranging that makes the new thing, not the act of breaking. Even whatever is left after being broken is defined by its existence afterwards, not the act that breaks it. Violence is occasionally a tool used to prepare for creation -- and has merit precisely to the extent that it does and no further -- but it cannot, itself, create.

... in any case, just action -- justice -- is no more a ridiculous concept than right action or good action. Close enough to synonymous that the distinction borders irrelevant. It's not defined by people in positions of power, it's defined by the system it's framed within -- and those in power only have a limited capability to decide that system. The individual has more control over how they frame the world (which system they operate within) around them than pretty much anything short of their base physical construction, for all that they almost always exercise that control to a limited extent. The concept that justice can only flow from the powers that be is faintly ridiculous.

[Descan]

I dunno, bro. Hammering a piece of metal is pretty destructive. Using explosives in mines is pretty destructive. Some... other... things... Look, all I had were metal-work and mining as destructive processes that still create something, okay?! D:

[Sirus]

Supernovas. The death explosions of massive stars, more powerful than every nuclear weapon on Earth by more orders of magnitude than I currently have the wits to calculate.
And yet, it is in these explosions that elements heavier than iron are formed. Things like uranium, gold, stuff like that. And those elements go on to form things like our own planet. Sounds like creation from destruction to me.

[Frumple]

You cannot create via destruction. You can break something and then rearrange it into something else, but it's the act of rearranging that makes the new thing, not the act of breaking. Even whatever is left after being broken is defined by its existence afterwards, not the act that breaks it. Violence is occasionally a tool used to prepare for creation -- and has merit precisely to the extent that it does and no further -- but it cannot, itself, create.

[Descan]

Then there are pieces of art that are a result of destruction and nothing more. Simply the broken object or scene is the art, and the only addition/re-arrangement the artist does is add context of "This is Art."

Plus, destruction is just another way to re-arrange something. Sure, you COULD make the argument that destruction is into re-arrangement into a less ordered system, but I don't think that's always the case.

Also: Percussive maintenance.

[Sirus]

You cannot create via destruction. You can break something and then rearrange it into something else, but it's the act of rearranging that makes the new thing, not the act of breaking. Even whatever is left after being broken is defined by its existence afterwards, not the act that breaks it. Violence is occasionally a tool used to prepare for creation -- and has merit precisely to the extent that it does and no further -- but it cannot, itself, create.

Dude, did you not see my supernova example? It's the extreme heat and pressure of the explosion itself that causes the elements to combine in ways that mere fusion cannot do itself - in other words, the very act of destruction is creating new things.

Does that apply to the human world? Possibly not.

[GiglameshDespair]

The elements themselves are created in the supernova. Whether they go on to form planets and whatnot later is irrelevant - they are a new thing, created exclusively by a highly violent event.

[Descan]

I have these weird grains in my hair and scalp, and I'm not sure if it's lice or what. A quick google reveals a generalized discussion of something called "DHT crystals" (rather large percentage of total hits for "Grains in hair", which is surprising. I would have suspected lice would have gotten a bigger share)

"DHT crystals" don't by themselves get any reputable hits, however DHT is apparently a thing so I'll give it the benefit of the doubt.

Apparently these granular... things, in my hair, are a symptom of hair-loss? According to the DHT thing at least. Unsurprising, my father is bald and my grandfather has rather sparse hair. Would prefer not to be bald, but whatever. Maybe it won't be AS bad, neither of them were really bald so much as had an (extremely) pronounced widows peak.

Guess this isn't exactly the right topic, might fit as well in WTF as anything, but whatever~

(doesn't help that I also have various scabs in my scalp from itching so much. ;-;)

[GiglameshDespair]

Well, if you use a really fine toothed comb over a bath or something you should catch some lice if they're there, and you can see the moving. If you're really not certain, give it a couple of washes with some anti-lice shampoo or shave your head.  Never heard of 'DHT crystals' before.

[Descan]

I might shave it during the summer, it'll be hot anyway. :v

[Tack]

Better than flipping someone's desk.

I have done that back in school; pretty much threw it at him, or that was how the rumors ended up saying.

Hate to say it, but being aggressive doesn't stop shitheads. It should, but at the end of the day you lose. Not to say it doesn't work on everyone. That kid, for instance, never sat behind me again.
But at the end of the day, getting a teacher, getting aggressive, joking with them, ignoring them, or calmly whispering threats are all techniques which may work on some bullies, but others will be impervious, and there's nothing you can do there which won't end in a lengthy court case.

... Two pages late, but hey...

[Sinistar]

Oh and whoever separated animal and human violence, don't.
Humans ARE animals. Otherwise we would be plants.

Oh, but I will. I've made it very clear why, in fact, I didn't even separate them but recognized them instead as two different things. For what is worth, conclusions like that in the second line of this quote are what makes me sad. But to not stray to far from topic, I'm dropping this discussion.