Is it moral to speculate on current trials,crimes???
- Thread starter Syzygys
- Start date
Mostly "speculation" is a waste of everyone's time and energy. But immoral? No.
You see, idle speculation on most anything is a waste of time and energy ....it accomplishes virtually nothing, including enjoyment (there's always someone who will argue with you).
Baron Max
You see, idle speculation on most anything is a waste of time and energy ....it accomplishes virtually nothing, including enjoyment (there's always someone who will argue with you).
Baron Max
Without any real facts , other than those which the media gives you, how
can anyone have a meaningful discussion about anything that happens in
the news? There are many things that occur in every news event which the
general public isn't made aware of to either illicit a inciting riot or develop a
hateful viewpoint as to the situations at hand. Sensationalism abounds and
the public is at the mercy of the medias hype and lies.
can anyone have a meaningful discussion about anything that happens in
the news? There are many things that occur in every news event which the
general public isn't made aware of to either illicit a inciting riot or develop a
hateful viewpoint as to the situations at hand. Sensationalism abounds and
the public is at the mercy of the medias hype and lies.
Besides the pointlessness of the idle speculation: if you accuse someone of a crime they haven't been convicted of you could be sued, or Sciforums could be sued, or both. Unlikely, I know - but why should the administration take unnecessary risks for your benefit?
.
.
I hope you are talking about the meaning of life discussions or religious or political debates, when you mention pointlessness....
Wasting time and energy is immoral.
I mostly agree. But I think it's also a conscious or subconscious intent to divide the readership/veiwership.
I'm still convinced, and becoming moreso, that the world is far, far more divided, much less cohesive, than at any time in history. And I blame most of it on the news media. Many news stories are simply things that we don't need to know about ...there's nothing "we, the people" can do about them.
Ignorance might not be totally blissful, but knowing bits n' pieces about too much surely can't be good for us.
But be that as it may, I'm becoming more convinced all the time that ignorance is, indeed, blissful.
Baron Max
It's fine to speculate on how things appear. It's part of human society. Too often, we get caught up in our speculations, though. How things appear frequently has nothing to do with how things are. Remember—
—that what we perceive is what we decide is relevant to us. The essence of a thing or situation may have nothing to do with what we perceive.
"A red rose absorbs all colours but red; red is therefore the one colour that it is not" (Perdurabo)
—that what we perceive is what we decide is relevant to us. The essence of a thing or situation may have nothing to do with what we perceive.
Then how come you moved my thread about Mr. Peterson? If CNN body language experts can speculate in front of 2-3 million viewers, I think I can speculate in front of 2000 readers...
By the way Baron accidentally made a good point, the original question was about morality and not usefullness. Everyody wastes teir time the way they like....
Mod Hat - Response
Mod Hat - Response
:wallbang:
What is it with people who want to complain but don't want to read?
Such irrelevance does nothing to increase my sympathy.
Now then, was this your purpose for this topic, or is there some aspect—worth discussing—that you'd like us all to consider?
Mod Hat - Response
Syzygys said:
:wallbang:
What is it with people who want to complain but don't want to read?
(A) It was, in part, because Max decided to have one of his irrelevant tantrums.
(B) That tantrum might have been avoided if you'd bothered to include a link.
(C) If you can't be bothered to include a link, I won't be bothered to clean up after other people in the topic.
(D) If the website blows, I can certainly accommodate you so that you don't have to put up with it anymore.
(B) That tantrum might have been avoided if you'd bothered to include a link.
(C) If you can't be bothered to include a link, I won't be bothered to clean up after other people in the topic.
(D) If the website blows, I can certainly accommodate you so that you don't have to put up with it anymore.
Such irrelevance does nothing to increase my sympathy.
Now then, was this your purpose for this topic, or is there some aspect—worth discussing—that you'd like us all to consider?
Last edited:
Quite honestly, fuck Max. By the way he is on my ignore, so fuck him , again.
Did I mention, fuck Max? Why do I have to care about every idiot on this website? There was no link, because I expect people to:
1. Read or hear the news.
2. Be able to google.
So am I getting it right, that instead of dealing with 1 idiot who ruins a thread, you move, delete or close the thread? Thanks for nothing...
Yeah, why can't we discuss, just like in a salon current events and speculate about them?
P.S.: You get a good point using Digg ( I saw your post), which is a superior site to Sciforums...
Mod Hat - Response
Mod Hat - Response
As much as I sympathize, I want to make one thing very clear: Compelling me to protect Max, as you do with such statements, does not increase my sympathy.
Your effin' problem.
No, it's a combination of things. First, the topic wasn't important enough to you to provide a link. Secondly, no, I wasn't in the mood to clean up other people's ejaculations. If the topic had meant enough to you to bother posting a link, I would have spent the time.
You mean like this topic would have done if you had any better purpose for it than whining?
Good for it.
Recommendation: Can the attitude.
Mod Hat - Response
Syzygys said:
As much as I sympathize, I want to make one thing very clear: Compelling me to protect Max, as you do with such statements, does not increase my sympathy.
Your effin' problem.
No, it's a combination of things. First, the topic wasn't important enough to you to provide a link. Secondly, no, I wasn't in the mood to clean up other people's ejaculations. If the topic had meant enough to you to bother posting a link, I would have spent the time.
You mean like this topic would have done if you had any better purpose for it than whining?
Good for it.
Recommendation: Can the attitude.