- May 1, 2016
- 28,894
- 56,301
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Moderator
- #76
There we go. I agree.Look we can round and round in circles, Ok I'll admit that pride in nation can be bad but it is not the only. But that seems to be the immediate reactionary assessment whenever the word 'nationalism' is mentioned.
... because you have done that in the past. You get stuck on something simple, and refuse to go beyond the simplistic.I think your reductive comment is drawing a very long bow, like I'm being willfully ignorant of any counter argument by making simple statements then claiming it cannot be argued.
The discussion we've had in here concerning the 'guns don't kill, people do' is an example of this. I've more or less stated that, on the surface at the extremely simple level, this is a logical statement that bears out in realistic terms, but I've then gone on to demonstrate that this is a reductive viewpoint because it ignores how much easier guns make killing. A gun is not the producer of the problem, but the facilitator.
You essentially got stuck on step one, after I'd already conceded it.
It might not be the intent, but you wield the word 'emotional' like a claymore the second you think you're on solid ground.Again that is not the intent, and no I don't go around telling people they're emotional. I go around not arguing the impractical just because there's an emotive intent to the counter.
There's all kinds of things that could be considered impractical. Colonising Mars could be considered impractical, but we could most certainly accomplish that inside 20 years if we devoted time and money to it.
Essentially, when we decide on an appropriate path, we should do so looking at more than simply what is practical.