News:

Welcome to week4paug.net 2.1 - same as it ever was! Most features have been restored, but please keep us posted on ANY issues you may be having HERE:  https://week4paug.net/index.php/topic,23937

Main Menu

Another campus shooting

Started by blatboom, February 14, 2008, 06:48:26 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sls.stormyrider

Quote from: Sophist on February 16, 2008, 11:40:53 AM
Quote from: susep73 on February 16, 2008, 12:21:29 AM
Quote from: Sophist on February 15, 2008, 12:53:09 PM
A gun is only "evil" when the user proceeds to use the gun in a negative context.  Guns exist in every nation in the world, its all about how the individual chooses to use the tools, not the tools being used.   

wmd
Thats not a valid argument.  Nuclear energy has been used for good things, it fits my description.  It is the people who use the tool, not the tool itself.  So controlling the tool doesn't solve the problem, those people can cause damage another way.  I can just easily argue that if every kid at that school had a gun, the shooting wouldn't have happened.  So the point of gun control is moot, as evil existed long before guns.   
or someone else would have got hit by the crossfire

More guns certainly aren't the answer. Gun control won't necessarily solve this one. It is a strange coincidence that the same internet arms dealer sold the Va Tech shooter and this shooter their weapons.
We just live in a fucked up society that has to be fixed.
how? beats me.
"toss away stuff you don't need in the end
but keep what's important, and know who's your friend"
"It's a 106 miles to Chicago. We got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark and we're wearing sunglasses."

susep

Quote from: Sophist on February 16, 2008, 11:40:53 AM
Quote from: susep73 on February 16, 2008, 12:21:29 AM
Quote from: Sophist on February 15, 2008, 12:53:09 PM
A gun is only "evil" when the user proceeds to use the gun in a negative context.  Guns exist in every nation in the world, its all about how the individual chooses to use the tools, not the tools being used.   

wmd
Thats not a valid argument.  Nuclear energy has been used for good things, it fits my description.  It is the people who use the tool, not the tool itself.  So controlling the tool doesn't solve the problem, those people can cause damage another way.  I can just easily argue that if every kid at that school had a gun, the shooting wouldn't have happened.  So the point of gun control is moot, as evil existed long before guns.   

I agree that evil has been around for awhile but guns and nuclear weapons are an extension of evil, their very creation is rooted in evil. 

fauxpaxfauxreal

Quote from: jephrey on February 15, 2008, 09:39:20 PM
No relatives, but many friends used to go there, some coworkers don't miss any of their football games, it's only about 20 minutes from my house, my wife had a class in that same lecture hall...  It is pretty crummy.  People that do this type of thing are obviously sick.  Why take out more than just yourself? 

I had the numbed response when I first heard...  Actually one of the people killed was from Carpentersville (neighbors my town). 


I figured as much.  We had a similar situation here last year with Virginia Tech.  It was definitely eerie here last April.

The numbed response is most depressing.

The pictures in the papers here definitely appeared "numbed".


sophist

Quote from: susep73 on February 16, 2008, 06:28:38 PM
Quote from: Sophist on February 16, 2008, 11:40:53 AM
Quote from: susep73 on February 16, 2008, 12:21:29 AM
Quote from: Sophist on February 15, 2008, 12:53:09 PM
A gun is only "evil" when the user proceeds to use the gun in a negative context.  Guns exist in every nation in the world, its all about how the individual chooses to use the tools, not the tools being used.   

wmd
Thats not a valid argument.  Nuclear energy has been used for good things, it fits my description.  It is the people who use the tool, not the tool itself.  So controlling the tool doesn't solve the problem, those people can cause damage another way.  I can just easily argue that if every kid at that school had a gun, the shooting wouldn't have happened.  So the point of gun control is moot, as evil existed long before guns.   

I agree that evil has been around for awhile but guns and nuclear weapons are an extension of evil, their very creation is rooted in evil. 

That's an invalid argument.  Your conclusion is a faulty syllogism.
Your argument takes the following form:

All WMD's are evil
All WMD's are made by man
---------------------------
Therefore evil derives from man

This is a sound argument (you have two true premises and a true conclusion).  We arrive at the faulty syllogism via the inference of the conclusion, we know for a fact that opinions on WMD's are subjective, and that the intent of science is to further the steps of society through technological progress.  So we have to conclude that premise one is false.  While premise two is true, the truth functioning value of the conclusion depends on the sentential structure of your argument.  You have the following sentential structure:
Quote from: susep73
Hollywood, Media, Right to bear arms, Industrial-Military Complex...violence in America is unparallel, domestic and abroad.

The images of today's shooting, and I've yet to see any media or footage, are surreal.  Tougher and more progressive gun control might help, extensive psychological investigations into weapons applicants.
Its our version of a suicide bomber, totally fucked up.
The main operator of the first sentence is a conjunction, and the rules of sentential logic dictate that for that premise to be true, both conjuncts must be true.  In this case, sound arguments can be made for your points.  The second sentence is inductive and lacks an absolute truth functioning value, which brings us to the third sentence.  The main operator is again a conjunction.  The last part of the sentence also lacks a truth functioning value (the language is ambiguous and the statement is subjective to your view on government interaction with society), as it is inductive as well.  I am going to break down the paragraph:

Let A = Hollywood, Media, Right to bear arms, Industrial-Military Complex
Let B = violence in America is unparallel, domestic
Let C = violence in America is unparallel, abroad
Let D = The images of today's shooting, and I've yet to see any media or footage, are surreal
Let E = Tougher gun control laws
Let F = More progressive gun control laws
Let G = extensive psychological investigations into weapons applicants

The translation of your argument:

(A*(B*C)), (D), ((G*(E*F)))

If we assign a truth functioning value to A-G, and acknowledge that D and G can't be proven true or false, thus we will mark them with a "?."  Let A,B,C,E, and F have a truth functioning value of true.  We will start with sentence one:
A true conjunct on both sides of (B*C), yields a true value.  The same is for (A*(B*C)).  Sentence one is true, sentence two is ambiguous and will be defined as ?.  G is ambiguous as well, which means the truth functioning value of sentence three could be true or false.  If G is true, then sentence three is true, if it is false, then sentence three is false.  The previous argument I provided yields sufficient evidence to give (E*F) a truth functioning value of false.  Thus making sentence three (?*F).  If one conjunct is false, the whole argument is false. 

So we have the following truth functioning values:
(i) T
(ii) ?
(iii) F

The language suggests that your three sentences are logically connected by conjuncts, thus the conclusion will be false, and making the argument invalid.  I will also submit that you are incorrect based on the rules of categorical logic as well.  The form of the argument can be countered, and since the form can be proven invalid, the argument is invalid.  A perfect counterexample would be the following argument:

original form:
All WMD's are evil
All WMD's are made by man
---------------------------
Therefore evil derives from man


counterexample:
All Dogs are mammals
All Cats are mammals
-------------------------
Therefore dogs are cats

In this argument the conclusion is false, which means the form itself is invalid. 




Can we talk about the Dead?  I'd love to talk about the fucking Grateful Dead, for once, can we please discuss the Grateful FUCKING Dead!?!?!?!

Marmar

look at the root cause here folks....

psychotropic drugs, their dangers, and their withdrawal problems.....

the guy purchased the guns thru the SAME SITE the VA Tech nut got his from.....

This is all part of an agenda by the nazi's in control on BOTH sides to validate further erosions of our rights granted by the constitution and the bill of rights.....mark my words, the supreme court will rule on this (via the DC Gun Ban) and say something to the effect of "you have the right to own a gun, unless we say you can't"......Just like the Patriot Act....we have the right to free speech, as long as it isn't critical of the government...and if it is, we're a terrorist.....That is not free speech.

Research it folks....most ALL of these horrific shootings took place in Disarmament Zones (places where you or I can not defend ourselves against such tragedies), and the shooters were either on psychotropic drugs, or recently came off them. Columbine shooters Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, as well as 15-year-old Kip Kinkel, the Oregon killer who gunned down his parents and classmates, and Cho Seung Hui, the Virginia Tech killer, were all on psychotropic drugs. Jeff Weise, the Red Lake High School killer was on prozac, "Unabomber" Ted Kaczinski, Michael McDermott, John Hinckley, Jr., Byran Uyesugi, Mark David Chapman and Charles Carl Roberts IV, the Amish school killer, were all on SSRI psychotropic drugs.

There are just far too many coincidences here to believe that they were just "evil people."  If you look into the shootings that did take place where there was no Disarmament Zone, you'll find that as soon as the carnage started the people who WERE armed quickly squashed the potential killers abilities to do more harm by blowing the asshole to kingdom come BEFORE the purposely slow acting law enforcement agencies were able to arrive and "help".

Just as 9/11, this is all a ploy to get us to relinquish more of our rights.....I know that if they come knocking on my door, they'll have to murder me in order to get me to give up my right to protect myself and my property. Welcome to the Police State of Amerkia....and it's only going to get worse....mark my words.
Who's the Marmar? I'm the Marmar!!!

Phish doesn't write beautiful music...the beautiful music happens after the written parts.

<gainesvillegreen> now, if they could get their sound to be as good as the lights, we'd have a band hee-yah!!

Music is what feelings sound like.

Marmar

FYI- "Gun Control" is hitting what you aim at.....

TYRANNY is taking away the abilities of the average law abiding citizen to defend themselves, and their rights.
Who's the Marmar? I'm the Marmar!!!

Phish doesn't write beautiful music...the beautiful music happens after the written parts.

<gainesvillegreen> now, if they could get their sound to be as good as the lights, we'd have a band hee-yah!!

Music is what feelings sound like.

Bobafett

very interesting discussion here guys.  +k to all involved! 















now gun control this, bitches   :samurai: 

:-P
The events in our lives happen in a sequence in time, but in their significance to ourselves they find their own order; the continuous thread of revelation.

susep

Quotewe know for a fact that opinions on WMD's are subjective, and that the intent of science is to further the steps of society through technological progress.

did the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki think subjectively of their nuclear experience?  Not that I'm a disbeliever in science because I do practice the scientific method, but a major fault in human consciousness is our ability to think that our scientific advances "further" us. 
Does evil exist outside of human consciousness?  Is a meteor crashing into the Earth evil? 

Quote
counterexample:
All Dogs are mammals
All Cats are mammals
-------------------------
Therefore dogs are cats

In this argument the conclusion is false, which means the form itself is invalid. 

at some point back in the evolutionary ladder cats and dogs are  derived from a similar origin of mammalian evolutionary history which is really my main point, the idea that there is connectivity. 


sophist

Injecting an emotional counterpoint into the argument is also a logical fallacy, and does nothing to refute the concept of "its the people not the tool" argument.  Your reverting to semantics in order to appeal to the emotional aspect of the problem, and emotion is subjective.  The argument can't be beaten objectively.         

QuoteIs a meteor crashing into the Earth evil? 
no.  Evil requires intent, and meters don't have the ability to intend.   


Can we talk about the Dead?  I'd love to talk about the fucking Grateful Dead, for once, can we please discuss the Grateful FUCKING Dead!?!?!?!

fauxpaxfauxreal

Thank you sophist for your introduction to symbolic logic.

This is very helpful.

The answer is, at infinity parallel lines intersect.

I hope this helps you solve your difficult equation.

<3 FauxPaxFauxReal

sophist

Quote from: fauxpaxfauxreal on February 20, 2008, 11:51:11 AM
Thank you sophist for your introduction to symbolic logic.

This is very helpful.

The answer is, at infinity parallel lines intersect.

I hope this helps you solve your difficult equation.

<3 FauxPaxFauxReal
Another stellar contribution to the paug by faux

Can we talk about the Dead?  I'd love to talk about the fucking Grateful Dead, for once, can we please discuss the Grateful FUCKING Dead!?!?!?!

rowjimmy

To have a debate on the nature of humanity and its evils while excluding emotional factors is ridiculous.
Just so you know.


blatboom

Whats ridiculous is to blame anything or anybody for this other than than the asshole that did the shooting.  There's tons of people out there with mental problems that don't go around murdering innocent college kids.

susep

Quote from: Sophist on February 20, 2008, 08:33:18 AM
Injecting an emotional counterpoint into the argument is also a logical fallacy, and does nothing to refute the concept of "its the people not the tool" argument.  Your reverting to semantics in order to appeal to the emotional aspect of the problem, and emotion is subjective.  The argument can't be beaten objectively.         

I can appreciate both object/subject but what defines the / in this statement?  Are the two not linked?  In Robert Pirsig's novel, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, Pirsig defines Quality as the bridge between object/subject. 
Just as a refresher phan, what is your arguement again?

bluecaravan521

Quote from: blatboom on February 21, 2008, 10:14:43 PM
Whats ridiculous is to blame anything or anybody for this other than than the asshole that did the shooting.  There's tons of people out there with mental problems that don't go around murdering innocent college kids.

QFT
The gun control debate is obviously relevant here, but we can't forget this fact when using this example to backup/refute all claims.
Information is not knowledge. Knowledge is not wisdom. Wisdom is not truth. Truth is not beauty. Beauty is not love. Love is not music. Music is the best...