User Tag List

First 5678 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 76

Thread: N elitism

  1. #61
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sentura View Post
    jesus. either you're a complete logical idiot, or you just don't get my point.

    if a nuclear war breaks out and bombs are being dropped on major cities across every country on the entire fucking planet, don't you think there'd be more than 5 million causalities? do you not understand that i don't give you the option to choose between; it's kill 5 million now or a full scale nuclear war. it isn't "kill for peace" as much as it is "kill for survival". world peace is a perk in this situation.

    You're being completely dense. I will make it clear: you do not kill millions of people to prevent ANYTHING, unless they are all about to kill you or others. And it has to be THEM, not the leaders of their nations.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  2. #62
    Phoenix Incarnate Sentura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    ENXP
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    750

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    You're being completely dense. I will make it clear: you do not kill millions of people to prevent ANYTHING.
    you'd make a great president, wouldn't you?
    i hunt INXPs for bounty
    FUNCTION ORDER FOR THOSE THAT CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHAT ENXP MEANS: Ne > Ni > Fi=Ti > *

    ...people tell me i have wildfires in my eyes

  3. #63
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sentura View Post
    you'd make a great president, wouldn't you?

    Yes, I would be a lot better than the assholes thrown up in this country the last 80 years or so.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  4. #64
    Phoenix Incarnate Sentura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    ENXP
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    750

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    You're being completely dense. I will make it clear: you do not kill millions of people to prevent ANYTHING, unless they are all about to kill you or others. And it has to be THEM, not the leaders of their nations.
    well shoot.

    U.S. POPClock Projection

    tells me that right now there are just above 300 million americans in existence. given that a super power would launch nukes at you (and you wouldn't retaliate), we could assume that all major cities and surrounding areas would be completely devastated. there are 50 states, which would mean at least 50 major cities counting around 2 million people on average (surrounding areas included). my quick math skills tell me that would be 100 million deaths alone, not counting any other large cities that may have been targeted as well.

    and you'd still not choose the death of 5 million to avoid the death of 100 million? i'll be damned, you're a humanist through and through.
    i hunt INXPs for bounty
    FUNCTION ORDER FOR THOSE THAT CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHAT ENXP MEANS: Ne > Ni > Fi=Ti > *

    ...people tell me i have wildfires in my eyes

  5. #65
    Magical BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,002

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sentura View Post
    well shoot.

    U.S. POPClock Projection

    tells me that right now there are just above 300 million americans in existence. given that a super power would launch nukes at you (and you wouldn't retaliate), we could assume that all major cities and surrounding areas would be completely devastated. there are 50 states, which would mean at least 50 major cities counting around 2 million people on average (surrounding areas included). my quick math skills tell me that would be 100 million deaths alone, not counting any other large cities that may have been targeted as well.

    and you'd still not choose the death of 5 million to avoid the death of 100 million? i'll be damned, you're a humanist through and through.
    What the hell does this have to do with N superiority? He JUST said that you shouldn't kill unless someone is trying to harm you or others. And with launching a nuke and with these supposed 100 million deaths, yeah that's harming "you or others". So uh... Yeah. I have no idea what this post is supposed to even accomplish.

    But seriously, how is this related?
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

  6. #66
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sentura View Post
    well shoot.

    U.S. POPClock Projection

    tells me that right now there are just above 300 million americans in existence. given that a super power would launch nukes at you (and you wouldn't retaliate), we could assume that all major cities and surrounding areas would be completely devastated. there are 50 states, which would mean at least 50 major cities counting around 2 million people on average (surrounding areas included). my quick math skills tell me that would be 100 million deaths alone, not counting any other large cities that may have been targeted as well.

    and you'd still not choose the death of 5 million to avoid the death of 100 million? i'll be damned, you're a humanist through and through.

    Well, let's see. How does 50 states = 50 major cities? Alaska, Wyoming, Vermont, et al. have none; California and Texas have several. Also, there are only 4 cities in the United States with more than 2 million people, and fewer than 30 metropolitan areas with more than 2 million people. So, your figures are basically pulled out of your ass. Secondly, retaliation against a nuclear enemy would do nothing to save the populace of the United States, so I don't see how whether I would retaliate would affect things at all. Thirdly, there is technology already developed that would help create an anti-nuclear defense shield, and that would be a national defense priority for me. In the end, you're positing a hypothetical that has nothing to do with what we were talking about. Of course, 5 million dead is "better" than 100 million dead, but INTENTIONALLY killing 5 million vs. 100 million has no ethical difference. That's like the old Hitler vs. Stalin vs. Mao argument. Is one worse than the others? Their body counts range from 10-12 million to 50-60 million, but does that matter at all? Or do we go by percentage of the population dead? Isn't the point that they're mass murderers?
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  7. #67
    Phoenix Incarnate Sentura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    MBTI
    ENXP
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    750

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    Well, let's see. How does 50 states = 50 major cities? Alaska, Wyoming, Vermont, et al. have none; California and Texas have several. Also, there are only 4 cities in the United States with more than 2 million people, and fewer than 30 metropolitan areas with more than 2 million people. So, your figures are basically pulled out of your ass.
    i'm glad we agree. making assumptions is pulling crap out of your ass. but yeah, i'm sure that even with those metropolitan areas, the causalities could go well over 5 million - which, again, was my point. i wouldn't care about whether every state has a major city per se, just that the combined bombed population was over 5 million, obviously.

    Secondly, retaliation against a nuclear enemy would do nothing to save the populace of the United States, so I don't see how whether I would retaliate would affect things at all. Thirdly, there is technology already developed that would help create an anti-nuclear defense shield, and that would be a national defense priority for me. In the end, you're positing a hypothetical that has nothing to do with what we were talking about.
    actually yes it has - i was trying to prove a point. it was a hypothetical situation, i'm surprised you didn't see that before now. i'll make a note about expecting less from people over the internet.

    Of course, 5 million dead is "better" than 100 million dead, but INTENTIONALLY killing 5 million vs. 100 million has no ethical difference. That's like the old Hitler vs. Stalin vs. Mao argument. Is one worse than the others? Their body counts range from 10-12 million to 50-60 million, but does that matter at all? Or do we go by percentage of the population dead? Isn't the point that they're mass murderers?
    who cares about ethics? also, let's just forget about anything good any mass-murdering leader ever has done for any nation ever. i mean, isn't the label mass-murderer overriding any former title?

    either way, i wasn't discussing the ethics of this situation. i was discussing what would be the proper thing to do. since the situation was entirely hypothetical, we can assume that we don't have to care about details outside of our scope. thanks for playing.
    i hunt INXPs for bounty
    FUNCTION ORDER FOR THOSE THAT CANNOT UNDERSTAND WHAT ENXP MEANS: Ne > Ni > Fi=Ti > *

    ...people tell me i have wildfires in my eyes

  8. #68
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sentura View Post
    i'm glad we agree. making assumptions is pulling crap out of your ass. but yeah, i'm sure that even with those metropolitan areas, the causalities could go well over 5 million - which, again, was my point. i wouldn't care about whether every state has a major city per se, just that the combined bombed population was over 5 million, obviously.
    First of all, it's casualties, not causalities. More importantly, 5 million vs. 100 million is not the question. Who did the killing and why they did it are the issues at hand.


    actually yes it has - i was trying to prove a point. it was a hypothetical situation, i'm surprised you didn't see that before now. i'll make a note about expecting less from people over the internet.
    What are you talking about? I know it's a hypothetical; no one is killing anyone in real life, and this issue hasn't come up in real life outside of the instance of dropping atomic bombs on Japan (which I maintain was wrong). I was trying to demonstrate to you that your question has no validity EXCEPT as an ethical question, and that there is no difference there unless I am killing innocent people deliberately, which is wrong in any context.


    who cares about ethics?
    Considering it was an ethical dilemma that you posed, I would say anyone who ponders it.


    also, let's just forget about anything good any mass-murdering leader ever has done for any nation ever. i mean, isn't the label mass-murderer overriding any former title?
    Yeah, pretty much. I don't think that Hitler's oratorical gifts or Stalin's bureaucratic skills or Mao's popular nonfiction really matter much when you look at their track records, do you? The fact that they thought they were doing good when they were actually doing evil is something to think about it in "ends justify the means" situations, I think.


    either way, i wasn't discussing the ethics of this situation. i was discussing what would be the proper thing to do. since the situation was entirely hypothetical, we can assume that we don't have to care about details outside of our scope. thanks for playing.
    You are really obtuse. You "weren't discussing the ethics of this situation," but you were "discussing what would be the proper thing to do." What the hell do you think the words "ethics" means? Descriptive ethics is the branch of philosophy that considers the moral outcome of specific situations. If you are trying to be completely utilitarian and maintain that 5 million dead is better than 100 million dead, and it does not matter why or by whose hand, fine, but that that line of argument really has no consideration for the value of individual human lives outside of statistics.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  9. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    693

    Default

    Of course the nt's tend to be superior in strategic intellect, it is how we are cut. The nf tend to be more gifted than most in their deep understanding of others. I am however sincerely happy that s types especially the sj are the majority. I mean seriously if there is any truth to this typology stuff could you think of a better type to be the pillars of society. I don't think most n types really give enough of a shit to keep society as we know it functioning over the long haul.

  10. #70
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Posts
    18

    Default

    I think for those unfamiliar with the myrers briggs test, they'd simply term their N qualities as "depth" or "capability for abstract thought" and would consider it a major divisive point too, even if they're not able to quantify it quite as much.

Similar Threads

  1. Elite Squad 1 & 2
    By Rasofy in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-04-2012, 07:59 PM
  2. Do you find regional accents more trust worthy than elite accents?
    By Survive & Stay Free in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 09-16-2011, 12:22 PM
  3. Elitism and social class
    By onemoretime in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 04-05-2010, 01:41 PM
  4. Do we need a new farm system for elitism?
    By coberst in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-24-2009, 01:18 PM
  5. S Elitism
    By Quinlan in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 07-04-2009, 09:07 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO