Here is comes again: Rightwankers don't do empathy.

dave b · 05-12-2009, 11:19 AM

We've just had a post that said - paraphrasing - that

"I can't envision needing to steal to eat, so I can't envision anybody else being the same."

Is this a rational way to look at the world? Society? Your fellow man?

Discuss.

db

gtramontelli · 05-12-2009, 11:29 AM

I foresee this thread having well thought-out arguments by people who come from a place of understanding and acceptance of others' viewpoint.

dave b · 05-12-2009, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gtramontelli

I foresee this thread having well thought-out arguments by people who come from a place of understanding and acceptance of others' viewpoint.

Perhaps.

db

county · 05-12-2009, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gtramontelli

I foresee this thread having well thought-out arguments by people who come from a place of understanding and acceptance of others' viewpoint.

You're a moron.

gtramontelli · 05-12-2009, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by county

You're a moron.

Your FACE!

county · 05-12-2009, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gtramontelli

Your FACE!

I don't know what that means?

BigBadBoom · 05-12-2009, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gtramontelli

I foresee this thread having well thought-out arguments by people who come from a place of understanding and acceptance of others' viewpoint.

HA!

gtramontelli · 05-12-2009, 11:43 AM

I'm just being bratty. Sorry.

DEMIAN1970 · 05-12-2009, 11:46 AM

Not that I don't enjoy a good thread and some of the assinine posts in them, but this would be like, what, thread number 4 on pretty much the same train of thought?
Just sayin'.

EEfz6 · 05-12-2009, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dave b

We've just had a post that said - paraphrasing - that

"I can't envision needing to steal to eat, so I can't envision anybody else being the same."

Is this a rational way to look at the world? Society? Your fellow man?

Discuss.

db

Reading comprehension > than you. My post said that I can't envision needing to steal to eat, therefor I can't imaging an instance that I would need to steal. I stated in plain English that not everyone has that same situation, and therefor that statement only applied to me.

Other's may very well be reduced to stealing to eat because their situation is different than mine. However, that does not make their victimization of another person justified. It only means that, for them, the risk of not stealing outweighed the risk of stealing. And if that risk catches up to them, they have to suffer the consequenses. Whether it be that they get arrested, or that they try to vintimize the wrong person.

EEfz6 · 05-12-2009, 12:38 PM

Here it is again. Seeing as how reading comprehension is obviously not your strong point, I will highlight the part where you are obviously having trouble understanding plain English.

Quote:

Originally Posted by EEfz6

While the stealing would not be justified, it would be a calculated risk that was taken. Risk of starving vs. risk of bodily harm from stealing.

Me, I honestly don't think I would steal, period. I live in the country. People are always giving away extra food out of their gardens is someone is just willing to come pick it. I hunt, so I am good for meat. If I lost everything and did not have weapons, I have plenty of friends with weapons who would gladly loan me one to use to feed my family. I cold easily kill 4-5 does per year if needed. hell, if I lost my house I could live in my parents shed (worst case scenario) assuming I couldn't live with them for some reason.

So, for me, there would be to great of risk stealing vs not stealing, and the calculated risk is not worth it. I understand that not everyone has those same options that I have, so there risks of stealing vs not would be calculated differently. And for them, stealing might actually be the lesser risk. That does not make it justified, it only makes it the smaller of the two risks. And if they take that risk and it goes bad, it was their choice to make.

jim schmidt · 05-12-2009, 01:29 PM

The lack of empathy is related to the righty inability to see anything more shaded than two sides to a story. They have the capacity for empathy, but without the insight to see the value in it, it never gets used.

Simple is as simple does.

Tripped1 · 05-12-2009, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dave b

We've just had a post that said - paraphrasing - that

"I can't envision needing to steal to eat, so I can't envision anybody else being the same."

Is this a rational way to look at the world? Society? Your fellow man?

Discuss.

db

I've been on both sides of that fence.

There is nothing wrong with being desparate, there are issues with rewarding it.

dave b · 05-12-2009, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EEfz6

Here it is again. Seeing as how reading comprehension is obviously not your strong point, I will highlight the part where you are obviously having trouble understanding plain English.

Perhaps you could address the OP.

and don't be so defensive.

db