Declaring allegiance to anything less than some form of "goodness" seems foolish to me.
For example, I may some day marry and have a wife who I love dearly. But, if she commits some heinous murder, I'm going to help any law enforcement agents as they seek to bring her to justice. This is because my ultimate allegiance is to what is good and right, not to a fallible human being.
This don't-declare-allegiance-to-fallible-humans extends to fallible systems. Any loyalty I may have to friends is subservient to an ultimate loyalty to what I feel is "right." In the same way, any loyalty I may have to my government, school, or occupation is secondary to this ultimate loyalty to "goodness."
As a consequence, I dislike the pledge of allegiance. "I pledge allegiance...to the republic...." But that republic is fallible. The human beings that make up that republic may require that I do something despicable. In such a case, I believe the right thing to do is to break that allegiance.
So, what good does it do to pledge allegiance to something fallible? Such an allegiance cannot always be maintained. In some situations, loyalty to the fallible must be broken in order to do what is right.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Why is Hitler never given English subtitles?
Interesting question with a fantastic answer:
"It makes him seem more "foreign." He seems more evil if you can't understand him.
Obviously, the Nazis were truly monsters. What I mean by "evil" is more like "cartoonishly evil." Most Americans see Hitler as this absolutely demonic figure, Satan incarnated in the flesh. The real lesson of course it that he wasn't. He was a man. Allowing you to hear his words makes him seem less evil. Ultimately, I think that should be the lesson. Hitler didn't roll into power on a drumroll of flames and brimstone. He came to power speaking the most wholesome themes of patriotism, family, traditional German greatness, etc. He was popular because of this. He didn't get into power solely on a "let's kill the Jews" platform.
There's a very similar contemporary version of this. We always want to make our enemies seem radically different from us, whether past or present enemies. The contemporary version is the translation of Muslim radicals. Go watch the translations of one of Bin Laden's or Ahmadinejad's speeches.
They'll translate every word into English. BUT they won't translate "Allah." Allah is just the Arabic word for God. But notice the difference between these two translations:
"Allah commands death to the infidels!"
"God demands we kill the non-believers!"
These are exactly the same. They both describe the same order from the same God, but the second one sounds much less foreign. For many, it's a disturbing reminder that the exact same God they worship in church every Sunday is worshipped by Muslims they demonize.
Language is a powerful thing. It shapes and molds our actions and thoughts. Slight differences in translation can completely change the feeling of a message, it's really a truly frightening thing."
"It makes him seem more "foreign." He seems more evil if you can't understand him.
Obviously, the Nazis were truly monsters. What I mean by "evil" is more like "cartoonishly evil." Most Americans see Hitler as this absolutely demonic figure, Satan incarnated in the flesh. The real lesson of course it that he wasn't. He was a man. Allowing you to hear his words makes him seem less evil. Ultimately, I think that should be the lesson. Hitler didn't roll into power on a drumroll of flames and brimstone. He came to power speaking the most wholesome themes of patriotism, family, traditional German greatness, etc. He was popular because of this. He didn't get into power solely on a "let's kill the Jews" platform.
There's a very similar contemporary version of this. We always want to make our enemies seem radically different from us, whether past or present enemies. The contemporary version is the translation of Muslim radicals. Go watch the translations of one of Bin Laden's or Ahmadinejad's speeches.
They'll translate every word into English. BUT they won't translate "Allah." Allah is just the Arabic word for God. But notice the difference between these two translations:
"Allah commands death to the infidels!"
"God demands we kill the non-believers!"
These are exactly the same. They both describe the same order from the same God, but the second one sounds much less foreign. For many, it's a disturbing reminder that the exact same God they worship in church every Sunday is worshipped by Muslims they demonize.
Language is a powerful thing. It shapes and molds our actions and thoughts. Slight differences in translation can completely change the feeling of a message, it's really a truly frightening thing."
Tuesday, July 5, 2011
Monday, January 24, 2011
How would you disprove your viewpoint?
From this.
The article's worth reading. In my opinion, being unable or unwilling to describe conditions in which personal beliefs would no longer be held is all it takes to be considered "unreasonable."
The article's worth reading. In my opinion, being unable or unwilling to describe conditions in which personal beliefs would no longer be held is all it takes to be considered "unreasonable."
Saturday, December 25, 2010
Saturday, December 4, 2010
Blind Servitude
It is my growing conviction that doing whatever your local Holy Man says on the basis of faith alone is a great evil.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)