Harper attacks Justin

[Argus]

It is a red herring, nobody will be able to figure out a root cause.

I think it was Rex Murphy who recently said lots of groups use terrorists as their shadow spokespersons by suggesting the terrorists are angry about X (which just happens to be the cause these people are supporting) and if we know what's good for us we'll address their concerns in this area. Of course, what the 'root cause' is varies depending on what each group supports, but basically they're saying we need to repent and address this thing which concerns them or the terrorists will strike again.

[Spiderfish]

Explaining things and understanding them is not the same thing as justifying them.

Trying to understand them would require reflecting on what they perceive is justification. There is no justification as far as I'm concerned, therefore understanding them is impossible.

[gunrutz]

Trying to understand them would require reflecting on what they perceive is justification. There is no justification as far as I'm concerned, therefore understanding them is impossible.

Careful now, it's almost as if you expect people to understand that reality is often different from what you read in books, most of us, with some sort of realistic outlook can accept that injustices occur, and that historically western society may be responsible for some of them, however, given that the world is not and will never be fair, and that we have always competed between cultures and nations, i would prefer to be on top rather than the bottom. Most of us would likely agree, and in that same vein, most of us would agree that killing our civilians is no more appropriate to us than us killing theirs is to them, we don't have to understand it beyond that we value our lives more than we value thiers, this is not abnormal, or evil, it is human. In a more perfect world that would not be, but that world doesn't exist, perhaps someday, but in the mean time if it comes down to my life, or my countrymen, i choose ours. I don't need to know what specific grievance any of them might have, they have been out competed, some day it may happen to us.

[Moonlight Graham]

I have no interest in trying to understand the emotions or feelings of a terrorist killer and rationalize why they would pursue the destruction of innocent human life to express their emotional sensitivity. I don't believe I could put myself in such a place, even if I thought it would help end evil.

Then stick your head in the sand, that's your choice, but it will mean your analysis of the situation will be incomplete and inadequate.

Murder is murder, plain and simple, and there is no circumstance in my mind that would justify such action.

Did you not read what you just quoted from me? I said "empathy doesn't mean appeasement or not severely punishing the killers."

Cybercoma at least gets what i'm saying:

Cybercoma: "Explaining things and understanding them is not the same thing as justifying them."

[jacee]

Trying to understand them would require reflecting on what they perceive is justification. There is no justification as far as I'm concerned, therefore understanding them is impossible.

I think you're missing the purpose of "understanding" - ie, to know who else might be involved, what they're trying to accomplish, etc, and stop them and prevent any further attacks.

[Spiderfish]

Then stick your head in the sand, that's your choice, but it will mean your analysis of the situation will be incomplete and inadequate.

Fair enough...I'll leave the empathizing with terrorist murderers up to you and JT. Good luck with that.

Did you not read what you just quoted from me? I said "empathy doesn't mean appeasement or not severely punishing the killers."

Cybercoma at least gets what i'm saying:

Did you not read my reply to Cyber? I said "Trying to understand them would require reflecting on what they perceive is justification. There is no justification as far as I'm concerned, therefore understanding them is impossible. The very definition of empathy is to try and understand the emotions or feelings of the person you're expressing empathy towards. I cannot feel empathy towards a person who decides to express their feelings of being "marginalized" by blowing innocent people to bits.

[Spiderfish]

I think you're missing the purpose of "understanding" - ie, to know who else might be involved, what they're trying to accomplish, etc, and stop them and prevent any further attacks.

Investigating and understanding motive, intent, and possible accomplices is important, but it's not achieved by feeling empathy for the terrorist killers.

Edited April 23, 2013 by Spiderfish

[Moonbox]

You're confusing empathy with sympathy. Empathy just means you're trying to view things from another perspective, however twisted it may be. Nobody should ever justify or condone terrorism, but sometimes it's a good idea to try and put yourself in a terrorist's shoes and imagine what the world looks like from his/her point of view.

The idea of strapping a bomb to your chest and blowing yourself up in a bus is so alien and so despicable to us it seems unimaginable. In other parts of the world, however, people have decided it's a reasonable and desirable course of action. It's not because they're all batshit crazy. It's because they grew up in and live in a completely different world than we did and view it entirely different than we do. Trying to see the world through their eyes is empathy, and it does excuse their actions or mean we sympathize with it.

The problem, however, is that a lot of the time these world views are not something that we can influence or change. Understanding them may, in the end, only give us fair warning of who not to trust and who to protect ourselves from, but that's still something we need to do.

Justin's comments, however, had undertones suggesting more than simply understanding what happened and why. His suggestion was that there was a tangible cause and effect relationship. This happened because we did or didn't do _______ .

[Moonlight Graham]

Investigating and understanding motive, intent, and possible accomplices is important, but it's not achieved by feeling empathy for the terrorist killers.

Moonbox is right, you're confusing empathy with sympathy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avhOZ8tww3Q

Edited April 23, 2013 by Moonlight Graham

[Spiderfish]

You're confusing empathy with sympathy. Empathy just means you're trying to view things from another perspective, however twisted it may be. Nobody should ever justify or condone terrorism, but sometimes it's a good idea to try and put yourself in a terrorist's shoes and imagine what the world looks like from his/her point of view.

I don't believe I am, empathy is identifying and recognizing a person's feelings or perspective to gain understanding, and is typically a precursor to compassion. Sympathy is agreeing with or sharing that feeling. Maybe I'm taking the definition too literally, I don't disagree that their perspective needs to be identified and recognized. I just don't see how you can really understand it if you can't relate to it. If a terrorist feels that it is acceptable in his view to kill innocent people for the sake of his cause, I understand that he has that perspective and that he has justification in his mind to act on it. But I don't understand how he got there, and I'm not sure all the reflection I can muster can give it more sense.

Edited April 23, 2013 by Spiderfish

[eyeball]

I have no interest in trying to understand the emotions or feelings of a terrorist killer and rationalize why they would pursue the destruction of innocent human life to express their emotional sensitivity. I don't believe I could put myself in such a place, even if I thought it would help end evil. Murder is murder, plain and simple, and there is no circumstance in my mind that would justify such action.

And that is precisely how people fed up with root cause deniers feel.

[Spiderfish]

And that is precisely how people fed up with root cause deniers feel.

I've been called worse.

[Moonbox]

I don't believe I am, empathy is identifying and recognizing a person's feelings or perspective, and is typically a precursor to compassion.

So you understand the term, but your logic is too broken for that to be of use to you. The statement above is just a giant fallacy. Understanding someone's perspective is no more a precursor to compassion as it is to further anger. You could just as easily end up hating the person more for doing what they did. If it turns out that they did it because they believe in a blood god that demands human sacrifice en masse, you're not going to feel compassion for them, but perhaps you can understand where the hell they came from and try to find out if you can stop additional attacks.

[Spiderfish]

So you understand the term, but your logic is too broken for that to be of use to you. The statement above is just a giant fallacy. Understanding someone's perspective is no more a precursor to compassion as it is to further anger. You could just as easily end up hating the person more for doing what they did. If it turns out that they did it because they believe in a blood god that demands human sacrifice en masse, you're not going to feel compassion for them, but perhaps you can understand where the hell they came from and try to find out if you can stop additional attacks.

If you are trying to quantify their logic or perspective, I'm with you. If you are trying to qualify it, that's where you lose me.

[eyeball]

The idea of strapping a bomb to your chest and blowing yourself up in a bus is so alien and so despicable to us it seems unimaginable. In other parts of the world, however, people have decided it's a reasonable and desirable course of action.

Imagine people from another world coming into our nations to provide aid, support and privileges to monsters who then torture, rape and murder us.

Justin's comments, however, had undertones suggesting more than simply understanding what happened and why. His suggestion was that there was a tangible cause and effect relationship. This happened because we did or didn't do _______ .

That's pretty much the same read a couple other billion of us on the planet get too.

[Moonbox]

Imagine people from another world coming into our nations to provide aid, support and privileges to monsters who then torture, rape and murder us.

and this is the kind of statement that people are wondering if Justin's hinting at - a thinly veiled attack on American foreign policy. At least eyeball comes out and says it....

That's pretty much the same read a couple other billion of us on the planet get too.

Which is a great thing for a political leader to say. "You guys are to blame for that 8 year old kid's death because you support the Shah in Saudi Arabia...."

Criticize American foreign policy if you want, but have the intelligence not to do it immediately after an event like this. Show some class.

If you are trying to quantify their logic or perspective, I'm with you. If you are trying to qualify it, that's where you lose me.

Understanding does not mean justifying or believing or sympathizing. FBI or RCMP profilers are expert empathizers. They have zero interest in justifying or sympathizing with a killer, but they try very hard to get in his head and find out why and how he does what he does.

Justin doesn't appear to be following this line of thought.

Edited April 23, 2013 by Moonbox

[eyeball]

Understanding does not mean justifying or believing or sympathizing.

Refusing to does.

[jacee]

Investigating and understanding motive, intent, and possible accomplices is important, but it's not achieved by feeling empathy for the terrorist killers.

Who said empathy? We're talking about "root causes".

You want to hold onto your anger/hatred. I get that.

However those aren't helpful in analysing and preventing crime. Do you get that?

[Spiderfish]

Who said empathy? We're talking about "root causes".

You're talking about root causes, the rest of us are discussing empathy. My initial response was to MG.

You want to hold onto your anger/hatred. I get that.

Since you don't have a clue what is even being discussed, I don't think you get much.

However those aren't helpful in analysing and preventing crime. Do you get that?

Emotional inputs are not helpful in objectively analyzing a crime...yes I believe I do get that.

Edited April 23, 2013 by Spiderfish

[carepov]

Careful now, it's almost as if you expect people to understand that reality is often different from what you read in books, most of us, with some sort of realistic outlook can accept that injustices occur, and that historically western society may be responsible for some of them, however, given that the world is not and will never be fair, and that we have always competed between cultures and nations, i would prefer to be on top rather than the bottom. Most of us would likely agree, and in that same vein, most of us would agree that killing our civilians is no more appropriate to us than us killing theirs is to them, we don't have to understand it beyond that we value our lives more than we value thiers, this is not abnormal, or evil, it is human. In a more perfect world that would not be, but that world doesn't exist, perhaps someday, but in the mean time if it comes down to my life, or my countrymen, i choose ours. I don't need to know what specific grievance any of them might have, they have been out competed, some day it may happen to us.

You are right, the "us versus them" mentality is human nature - even babies think this way. The key is defining "us".

-my immediate family?

-the members of my family of a certain gender?

-my clan?

-people of my village, as long as they have no apparent mental disorders?

-people of my country that have the same skin color as me and are heterosexual?

-people of my religion?

-people in my country and those in countries that have military alliances with mine?

-people on my continent?

Why not make it easy? "us" = human

[PIK]

Well the younger brother said they did it because of the hatred his brother had for america. There is your root cause, hatred and jealousy. They came from a place that sucks, and to see how the rest of us live was to much for him to take. Justin's root cause = our fault.

[cybercoma]

Then stick your head in the sand, that's your choice, but it will mean your analysis of the situation will be incomplete and inadequate.

Did you not read what you just quoted from me? I said "empathy doesn't mean appeasement or not severely punishing the killers."

Cybercoma at least gets what i'm saying:

Empathy is the wrong word. Understanding people's motivations doesn't have to be an exercise in empathy. I don't think anyone is going to empathize with a mass murderer, nor should they.

[cybercoma]

Justin's root cause = our fault.

Care to back that up?

[Spiderfish]

Knowing the root causes (or maybe more accurately, the factors that greatly influenced the bombers to do what they did) doesn't mean the act goes unpunished. The bombing was still a conscious act (unless both were mentally ill). Knowing the roots of why/how the bombers did what they did is key to preventing such events in the future, period. Jailing or killing them is fine, but by itself it doesn't prevent future terror attacks. I also don't see what's wrong with feeling empathy for the victims but also feeling empathy for the 2 guys that felt such hatred they decided to kill. Empathy doesn't mean appeasement or not severely punishing the killers.

I've given this some thought and on reflection, I think I basically agree with your position, with one exception. Understanding how and why they did what they did is an important part of preventing further events, it's the "why" I'm getting stuck on. We can break down and understand why they felt this act was justified. We can try to understand their position from an objective perspective, but I don't think we can really get a full understanding and comprehension of the "why" unless we are able to look at it from their perspective, which would involve an emotional investment in their position to gain understanding. I'm not sure this is something you could do objectively. If by empathy, you are referring to objective analysis of their position, I agree with you.

[cybercoma]

You don't have to be emotionally involved in someone's position to understand their motivations and where those motivations come from. Criminal profilers do this stuff for a living and if they got emotionally involved in every mass murderer they had to understand, then the profilers would lose their minds. I just don't understand why we spend time and money understanding everything we can about all other sorts of mass murderers, but when it comes to "terrorism," so many people blinded by political ideology just put their fingers in their ears and chalk it up to Islam. It's like boiling down all of the conflict in Ireland to Catholics vs Protestants. It's a ridiculous oversimplification to say the reason they're doing what they're doing is that they're from a particular ethnic/religious group. It's also grossly naive to say their reasons and justifications don't matter. None of that is to say that it's appropriate to "blame the victim" for these crimes either. Saying the United States has it coming is like saying a woman that wears revealing clothing has it coming when she gets raped. Not cool.