Summarizing the Iran debate
Larry Hamelin has given my commentary on his response to my Iran posting greater prominence on his site in the form of a posting of its own. My original posting is here; his response to it, which prompted my comments, is here; his original posting which started the discussion is here.; his further objections to my position are set forth here.
Hamelin's site first attracted my attention for its postings on atheism and transhumanism, which I think he does a very good job of defending. I find what I consider his rather hard-left politics considerably less appealing. I think his approach to questions such as the Iranian nuclear threat is far too fixated on abstract "moral" algorithms rooted in some unreal Platonic universe, and blind to the pragmatic considerations necessary to deal with the real world. Yet I have to say that he is one of the most ethical debaters I've seen on the internet, always going out of his way to treat opposing views fairly.
Update: Here's one last exchange. But that's the end of it as far as I'm concerned.
Hamelin's site first attracted my attention for its postings on atheism and transhumanism, which I think he does a very good job of defending. I find what I consider his rather hard-left politics considerably less appealing. I think his approach to questions such as the Iranian nuclear threat is far too fixated on abstract "moral" algorithms rooted in some unreal Platonic universe, and blind to the pragmatic considerations necessary to deal with the real world. Yet I have to say that he is one of the most ethical debaters I've seen on the internet, always going out of his way to treat opposing views fairly.
Update: Here's one last exchange. But that's the end of it as far as I'm concerned.
posted by Infidel753 at 9:57 AM
3 Comments:
If two people always agree, one of them is unnecessary.
I think his approach to questions such as the Iranian nuclear threat is far too fixated on abstract "moral" algorithms rooted in some unreal Platonic universe, and blind to the pragmatic considerations necessary to deal with the real world.
In short, he forgot to read Hobbes. ;)
C U on teh wheel™ :)
Just because I don't agree with Hobbes doesn't mean I haven't read him.
Post a Comment
Please be on-topic and read the comments policy. Spam, trolls, and fight-pickers will be deleted. If you don't have a Blogspot account and aren't sure how to comment, please see here. Fair warning -- I reject all comments containing any of the following:
1. Support for transgenderism
2. Negativity about Brexit
3. Support for a military draft or compulsory national service
I am not obligated to provide a platform for views I find morally abhorrent. And obviously I'm going to delete anything which is just quoting what an "AI" said. I want to hear from you, not from the always-wrong hallucination machine.
No comments advocating violence against any specific identifiable individual, even jokingly.
Please be considerate -- no political or politics-tinged comments on non-political posts, and no performative cynicism. Finally, please remember that this is a personal blog whose main purpose is to encourage contact from people with similar interests and world-views to mine. I really don't much care for arguing and debating; if arguing and debating is what you want, there are plenty of other places on the internet which welcome that.
<< Home