The History and Justice

[Guest]

Hello, everyone! I am one of the oldest lurkers here, decided to subscribe for the forums yet again. So here's my fresh topic:

10/12/05
Question:

How we can examine history with the objective of resolving past social injustices w/o creating new ones?

Let’s dissect this sentence, like a biology student dissects the frog. Words:

1) “How?” Examine objectively by the definition stated in the original question. Objectively, meaning we cannot be subjective. One cannot be perfectly non-subjective, because everything is relative; the point of view of a person must be relative to a certain thing, that’s how thing got to be compared. Give me the point of rest, and I’ll move the globe from its place!

2) “We” – People, the society of contemporaries.

4) “Can” – able to? Allowed to, or forced by the society, peoples. To examine.

3) "Examine" - observe and make a conclusion.

5) “History” – is a collection of written “evidence” by the contemporaries of a time period, or a subjective view of current time contemporaries.

6) “With the objective” – with a purpose. Everything must have a purpose in life; life w/o a purpose is just an existence, nothing more, isn’t it? Or is it?

7) “Resolving” – resolving, deciding, trying to figure out, making the only and definite conclusion, even though there’s no just black and white, but also grey line in between…

8) “Past” – the future that passed a generation: today became a yesterday, hundred years ago. Or a century, or ”bazillion” light years ago.

9) “Social” – complements “antisocial”, it’s a negative of black, or is it positive of white?

10) “Injustices” – what is justice thing anyway? Is it a heroine of book name Justice, or Robin Hood? A good guy who helps the poor by robbing rich people, trying to “even” out the wealth among the masses? Or is it a measly thief who has a bright idea of taking (which is “naturally” bad).

11) “W/o creating “ – human race is creative, just as God was. Is or will be. It’s hard to be non-creative, when your nature calls you. The call of nature can be really tough sometimes, especially when you were told not to be creative.

12) “New ones” – new things, something that wasn’t ever invented. Like a wheel, or back to the future machine :-)

Now, for this to make any sense, one has to ask She or he a question – “is the statement true or false” and then think about what is false and what is true. I am talking about any statement, not just the original one, but also the one I “just” made…

Drem

[Rhydderch Hael]

...How we can examine history with the objective of resolving past social injustices w/o creating new ones? ...[right][snapback]91992[/snapback][/right]

It would require the use of two swords, a time machine, and the assistance of a temporal scientist who looks like Charlize Theron in horn-rimmed glasses and a skimpy white lab coat.

As to our current capability to fulfill this task— two out of three is good. Not 'great', but we're getting there.



I couldn't quite get my head around the query, then I realized why: it's grammatically incorrect. It should be "How can we examine history...". Your piece-by-piece breakdown of the sentence brought that to the fore.

[Occhidiangela]

How we can examine history with the objective of resolving past social injustices w/o creating new ones?

Why bother? I suggest you are asking for an answer, in the abstract, to a question whose "resolution" cannot be implemented.

The past social injustices are in the past, and are not resolvable. They are rather a matter of record. Don't look back, dahling, it gets in the way of the now. The current and predicted social injustices we may be able to mitigate or prevent via prudent action.

You won't resolve anything that has already happened, not at any level deeper than the thin layer of new skin. The Pope's apologies to the Jews, a few years back, is a classic case of empty words that resolved nothing. It was a gesture, or as I saw it, posturing. Closure is not available for everything, nor can "I'm sorry" repair the broken vase, the burned down house.

Peoples of various groups, clans, and tribes make their own view of history, what bits they know of it in combination of fact, fiction, and myth. They put their own stamp on it. If you haven't read Balkan Ghosts, I highly recommend it. Kaplan does an excellent job of describing this phenomenon.

Myth and history are still inextricably mixed together in the minds of many groups of people. That barrier to resolution is too oft ignored by the residents of the Il Torre d'Avorio.

Occhi

[Rhydderch Hael]

...The Pope's apologies to the Jews, a few years back, is a classic case of empty words that resolved nothing.  It was a gesture, or as I saw it, posturing. ...[right][snapback]92001[/snapback][/right]

But it also drew a new line on the map. The Catholic Church's conduct in those times of Fascism and the Final Solution were borne upon its stance and perceptions that governed it up to that point. The Pope's apology lays down a new ground rule for the Church: what happened was wrong, and we see that now.

Any new circumstance in the future will have to contend with that decision now made. They cannot repeat those actions without having crossed the new line that the apology has drawn. They cannot assuage themselves of violating conscience by saying "We've never dealt with this problem before."

[Occhidiangela]

But it also drew a new line on the map. The Catholic Church's conduct in those times of Fascism and the Final Solution were borne upon its stance and perceptions that governed it up to that point. The Pope's apology lays down a new ground rule for the Church: what happened was wrong, and we see that now.

Any new circumstance in the future will have to contend with that decision now made. They cannot repeat those actions without having crossed the new line that the apology has drawn. They cannot assuage themselves of violating conscience by saying "We've never dealt with this problem before."
[right][snapback]92002[/snapback][/right]

Right. It resolved nothing of past issues. I have real doubts, given the selective cultural memories and appeals to emotion and "history" so frequently made, that the gesture will do anything for future matters, as you predict, but I tend to be cynical. The glass may indeed be half full, and the Papal precedent may be beneficial downstream.

Only time will tell, as it wounds all heals. ;)

Occhi

[Occhidiangela]

Hello, everyone! I am one of the oldest lurkers here, decided to subscribe for the forums yet again. So here's my fresh topic:

10/12/05
Question:

How we can examine history with the objective of resolving past social injustices w/o creating new ones?

Let’s dissect this sentence, like a biology student dissects the frog. Words:

1) “How?” Examine objectively by the definition stated in the original question. Objectively, meaning we cannot be subjective. One cannot be perfectly non-subjective, because everything is relative; the point of view of a person must be relative to a certain thing, that’s how thing got to be compared. Give me the point of rest, and I’ll move the globe from its place!

2) “We” – People, the society of contemporaries.

4) “Can” – able to? Allowed to, or forced by the society, peoples. To examine.

3) "Examine" - observe and make a conclusion.

5) “History” – is a collection of written “evidence” by the contemporaries of a time period, or a subjective view of current time contemporaries.

6) “With the objective” – with a purpose. Everything must have a purpose in life; life w/o a purpose is just an existence, nothing more, isn’t it? Or is it?

7) “Resolving” – resolving, deciding, trying to figure out, making the only and definite conclusion, even though there’s no just black and white, but also grey line in between…

8) “Past” – the future that passed a generation: today became a yesterday, hundred years ago. Or a century, or ”bazillion” light years ago.

9) “Social” – complements “antisocial”, it’s a negative of black, or is it positive of white?

10) “Injustices” – what is justice thing anyway? Is it a heroine of book name Justice, or Robin Hood? A good guy who helps the poor by robbing rich people, trying to “even” out the wealth among the masses? Or is it a measly thief who has a bright idea of taking (which is “naturally” bad).

11) “W/o creating “ – human race is creative, just as God was. Is or will be. It’s hard to be non-creative, when your nature calls you. The call of nature can be really tough sometimes, especially when you were told not to be creative.

12) “New ones” – new things, something that wasn’t ever invented. Like a wheel, or back to the future machine :-)

Now, for this to make any sense, one has to ask She or he a question – “is the statement true or false” and then think about what is false and what is true. I am talking about any statement, not just the original one, but also the one I “just” made…

Drem
[right][snapback]91992[/snapback][/right]

I just had a thought. I might be way out in left field, but here goes:

1. How much did you have to drink before you posted this? My initial response was on the alleged substance, while this response, due to a second reading of your post, thanks to the sharp eyes of other posters, looks at the quality of your offering and finds it wanting.

2. I have a hunch you spelled your name backwards, and left off the second "e" mon ami.

Occhi

[jahcs]

I'm not sure why you broke down each word of your post like that. Semantic and pragmatic arguments that happen (too often at the Lounge IMHO ;) ) do not do well when each word is examined in a vacuum.

And, as Occhi says "The past social injustices are in the past, and are not resolvable."

Study history, learn from it, and try to prevent new social injustices from happening. Oh, and keep an eye out for current injustices, those are the most important ones to work on.

[Tal]

How we can examine history with the objective of resolving past social injustices w/o creating new ones?

[right][snapback]91992[/snapback][/right]

Better question. Why do you need resolve past social injustices in order to examine history? It almost certainly implies that you are putting together history in a cause and effect approach. I would argue that history is a chaotic maelstrom. Making sense of it all is much like taking apart a quilt - one thread at a time. To get a better sense of the whole you must also examine the minute.

[Occhidiangela]

Better question. Why do you need resolve past social injustices in order to examine history? It almost certainly implies that you are putting together history in a cause and effect approach. I would argue that history is a chaotic maelstrom. Making sense of it all is much like taking apart a quilt - one thread at a time. To get a better sense of the whole you must also examine the minute.
[right][snapback]92013[/snapback][/right]

I find I make better sense of the whole when I examine the wdoughnut through the lens of wcoffee. :D

Occhi

[Guest]

I just had a thought.  I might be way out in left field, but here goes:

1.  How much did you have to drink before you posted this?  My initial response was on the alleged substance, while this response, due to a second reading of your post, thanks to the sharp eyes of other posters, looks at the quality of your offering and finds it wanting.

2.  I have a hunch you spelled your name backwards, and left off the second "e" mon ami.

Occhi
[right][snapback]92006[/snapback][/right]

1) :) I like your attitude, Occhi :) But i must tell you i am the most sober human being on the planet.
2) My name means this : Drem=me r D=DremerD , or you can put it as I are, I am , We are , multiples of is are, i am not limited by just the name Drem, because the name Drem is unlimited. I sleep, i am dreaming, about Drem, or about myself, because Drem is the universe, it is us and we, and you , Occhi :) My buddy, Mon Ami :wub:

[Guest]

One thing to note.

I wrote the answer to the question, I was asked the question; I am not trying to prove that "anybody" needs to review the history; reviewing history is repeating the history in itself, isn't it? Redundancy is evil? Ha-ha, hell no.

Another thing just came into my mind - what is hell? And why do you believe in it, when you already live in one? Do you really believe, people, that we live in Heaven? And what is Heaven then? Angelic creatures?

"I met a heavenly creature today, her name was Drem" :blush:

[Occhidiangela]

One thing to note.

I wrote the answer to the question, I was asked the question; I am not trying to prove that "anybody" needs to review the history; reviewing history is repeating the history in itself, isn't it? Redundancy is evil? Ha-ha, hell no.

Another thing just came into my mind - what is hell? And why do you believe in it, when you already live in one? Do you really believe, people, that we live in Heaven? And what is Heaven then? Angelic creatures?

"I met a heavenly creature today, her name was Drem"  :blush:
[right][snapback]92019[/snapback][/right]

If you are, as you say, a very sober soul, may I recommend Guinness? It is the best cure for sobriety that I know, and has only 125 calories per glass!

As to Heaven, we can't be living in it, since it is only available in the Afterlife. We are therefore either in Hell, or in Purgatory, but more likely, we are just


Right Here

On Earth, where our spirit takes on, for a brief episode of time, a fleshy shell wherein we find out what we are capable of within the limited context of Life as it is within in the human condition.

And, bless the good luck, one limited soul figured out beer, to the benefit and everlasting joy of posterity. The ripple from that rock went far, did it not?

Cheers

Occhi

[Guest]

If you are, as you say, a very sober soul, may I recommend Guinness?  It is the best cure for sobriety that I know, and has only 125 calories per glass!

As to Heaven, we can't be living in it, since it is only available in the Afterlife.  We are therefore either in Hell, or in Purgatory, but more likely, we are just
Right Here

On Earth, where our spirit takes on, for a brief episode of time, a fleshy shell wherein we find out what we are capable of within the limited context of Life as it is within in the human condition.

And, bless the good luck, one limited soul figured out beer, to the benefit and everlasting joy of posterity.  The ripple from that rock went far, did it not?

Cheers

Occhi
[right][snapback]92021[/snapback][/right]

:P Someone is trying to make Her drunk, the last time Drem drank beer, she acted fruity. Dream was very jealous of her drunkenness, but he cannot tolerate alcohol at all, only earthlings can tolerate that nasty substance.

Drem is very human in nature, but prefers to stay sober, with Her mind as clear as diamond (The Rock). But thanks for the offer, Occhi, cheers! I'll drink a glass full of healthy enzymes. It makes my body stronger with each sip. B)

[Taem]

Question:

How we can examine history with the objective of resolving past social injustices w/o creating new ones?

Drem
[right][snapback]91992[/snapback][/right]

When I first read this, the initial thought that came into my mind was WWII and Hitler's suicide - which I feel worked itself out pretty well without creating any social injustices on the surface - but I get the impression you have an idea about the "injustice" for which you speak and I wonder what main event, or culmination thereof, has brought this thought to your attention.

There are so many different kinds of social injustices; it's near impossible to examine ALL of them as a whole because they differ so completely. Take corporate America for example and the seemingly recent endless corruption of CEO's and the poor folks who invested their lifesavings into that companies stock, investors, employees, other businesses who relied on that company - all got screwed so I'd call that a social injustice by your definition of "social". How about slavery? Oppression? Child labor? There are large-scale social injustices such as the oppressive reign of Stallion of Russia (but that is subjective), and small-scale social injustices such as me getting a "lemon" car from a used dealership that got busted and now thousands, including myself, are out of their hard-earned money with no compensation or justice... Moreover, of course there are opinions on the every matter believing in either side of the argument. Something would not be an injustice unless one someone was screwed in someway while another benefited in some way - what is injustice to one is possibility to another, thus different opinions on each subject. There is no real "black" or "white" on any subject.

So, what really is a "social injustice" to you? What example do you base this on? Like I said, I think the WWII ending was just fine, however the "lemon" used car incident doesn’t deserve a national war, nor a 'suicide' to fix the problem. There is no one answer to your question.

EDIT - But I may just be blowing smoke because after rereading your post, I'm not entirely sure what your talking about :lol: .

[jahcs]

Why do I get the feeling Drem and Landru would get along famously?

[Guest]

So, what really is a "social injustice" to you? What example do you base this on? Like I said, I think the WWII ending was just fine, however the "lemon" used car incident doesn’t deserve a national war, nor a 'suicide' to fix the problem. There is no one answer to your question.

EDIT - But I may just be blowing smoke because after rereading your post, I'm not entirely sure what your talking about  :lol: .
[right][snapback]92027[/snapback][/right]

As I said in one of my posts above, I was asked the question; I dissected it as a biology student and got you some things to think about. I didn't want to state it in my original post, just because I like to confuse people.

And confused Occhi is so charming. Why even try to figure some silly delirium written by Drem, who feels fruity w/o even a glass of beer? I know why though. Because there’s a minuscule chance it makes perfect sense and then you feel like you know the answer to everlasting question of the universe.

What is history? Is it a collection of facts or lies? Sometimes it’s lies; sometimes it’s truth. But what is truth? The very truth you got nowadays won’t hold its ground in nearly future, when our children’s generation would say “It’s all lies!”

One good example there – Americans think they won the WWII by nuking Japanese; Russians on the other hand loved Stalin (their dictator) for winning the war. Even though he mutilated the country in fear of someone smarter than him would take the “throne” of Russian imperia. Why people love their dictators? Some of them like taking orders. Why some dictators get their arses handed to them? Just because the other half didn’t like taking orders :)

There’s one problem with history though – from human point of view it really is a problem – it’s an endless spiral repeating itself, like a chain of DNA, the basis of life of everything live on the planet. On the other hand some of you people think that DNA virus, or whatever virus for that matter isn’t a living particle…

So back to the history problem here – FORGET everything “bad” people! You shouldn’t think about it. It’s in the past now and meaningless. The Future is ahead of us.

Drem

P.S. How do you get in line with Future? Do you want to? Do you want to see the Future, and why? Do you really think? Think about dream. Emerald dream. Or think about me, your mother nature. Why are you killing me? Why? :(

[Munkay]

Better question. Why do you need resolve past social injustices in order to examine history? It almost certainly implies that you are putting together history in a cause and effect approach. I would argue that history is a chaotic maelstrom. Making sense of it all is much like taking apart a quilt - one thread at a time. To get a better sense of the whole you must also examine the minute.
[right][snapback]92013[/snapback][/right]

Building on the same thought Tal, there is another simpler precusory question:

After an event, can we ever give a full account of all the factors? Certainly when I was hungry and I ate food, the account is simply that I was hungry. Add the fact that I ate a donut that was located in my kitchen cabinet. Now the account get's a lot longer. Now this is a silly exercise, but it illuminates a simple fact: in order to understand anything you indeed must examine not the whole but the minute, but an account of the minute itself is fuzzier the harder it is examined [Can I ever really account for why I chose the chocolate donut and not the french cruller?].

All in all, you can trust the general account: I was hungry. This is more than satisfactory for any of my means, and surely as deep as I'll ever have to look.

The action itself is - to borrow your term - a "chaotic maelstrom" in a sense, and an account is a category we are attempting to classify it as after the fact. And as discussed earlier, it gets sticky once you get to the small issues. But if you are to answer Drem's first question, you must make that endevour to examine the minute issues. I think that's one endevour I'll sit out ;) .

Cheers,

Munk

[Occhidiangela]

[right][snapback]92035[/snapback][/right]

Does anyone besides me get the feeling that there is a physician specializing in altitis in the house?

Again, the clue is in the fewments, mayhap even the occult stool samples. ;)

Occhi

[Guest]

Does anyone besides me get the feeling that there is a physician specializing in altitis in the house?

Again, the clue is in the fewments, mayhap even the occult stool samples.  ;)

Occhi
[right][snapback]92040[/snapback][/right]

Simply beautiful, reminds me of a few things

[Guest]

It said: 'The History of every major Galactic Civilization tends to pass through three distinct and recognizable phases, those of Survival, Inquiry and Sophistication, otherwise known as the How, Why and Where phases.
"For instance, the first phase is characterized by the question How can we eat? the second by the question Why do we eat? and the third by the question Where shall we have lunch?"

Quoted by Mularky