I take pride in who I am (of which my origin is only a part). If my self-respect were in any way dependent on my origins, then I would feel there was something wrong. My sense of self-worth is bolstered immensely more by what I have done in life, rather than the accident of my birth.
Conversely, I would fiercely oppose anyone who attempted to subvert my sense of worth, purely on the basis of my origins. For this reason, I can only see nationalism as a defensive emotion, having very little to do with anything positive in life.
What's the problem with you people?
I thought that was a very fair update. Dealing with skins and setups for the AI is a PITA. If I was to summarise the review, it would be this:
You've tried Live for Speed and you know that the physics is good. There have been a few developments lately, but if you're expecting a change in the AI system, it hasn't been addressed yet.
You are really playing to the stereotype of being a bunch of cultists...
Some contenders there, but I have to plump for...
...its the only one that even begins to explain the feather duster!!
...its the only one that even begins to explain the feather duster!!
I said I reckoned the karts would handle better WITH an lsd, not ON it!
Maybe I'm assuming too much... It does go against what I have read before about the Greek use of the word atheos, but I'll have to accept your point, since it makes sense in relation to words like asexual, or atypical (and I'm sure you know that 'a-' is a prefix, not a suffix
). It also makes sense when looking at other privative prefixes, since 'in-' is used more often in English to suggest an opposite.@BBT... LOL, I wouldn't call myself a nihilist... my adopted name came from... well, some other time
Laws are made to be broken... Or at least tested and reinterpreted. Nature doesn't decide to do anything, but people decide whether to abide by laws, people define laws.
Last edited by nihil, .
I'm not sure thats strictly true. I'm no greek scholar, so I say this tentatively, but the Greek word 'atheos' is the direct root of 'atheism'. The prefix 'alpha' denotes not a passive lack, but an active denial of the gods, something we would indeed call antitheism (Christian opposition to the existence of gods other than God, meant they were often accused of atheism by Greek writers)
True, but to regard atheism as the logical antithesis of theism means you are locked in a binary struggle where one term is dependent for meaning on the other.
Its not so much that atheism is a religion, but that both religion and atheism can become ideologies in the sense that adherents claim their beliefs as universally true moralities. Any idea can become ideology (even science), but religion is more prone to this since to admit that your 'origin myth' is an expedient truth goes against the grain.
What should distinguish atheism from religion is precisely the recognition that when we create a model of the world, its form is transient at best. To this end, I have always considered the semantic differences between atheism and agnosticism to be trivial. Semantically speaking the 'a' in atheism comes from greek. The 'privative a' expresses a negation of a concept, so essentially atheism means to deny the existence of gods.
I don't find this helpful however, since it suggests a binary coupling between belief and non-belief; one cannot deny something without accepting its existence in the first place! So I tend to interpret the 'a' as meaning 'without' (in the sense of 'outside of') - an atheist is then someone whose life is lived outside of the concept of gods. Their existence or non-existence is irrelevant.
Agnosticism carries the notion of being undecided, so I prefer to be known as atheist, but I recognise that there is an ideological atheism that tends towards a belief system. I hope I've been clear enough to demonstrate that there needn't be an inevitable polarity of position.
Why? Its not silly - its awe inspiring. But when one is awestruck, one is also dumbstruck. This is the vacuum that I speak of: the point where language and ideas cease to have any meaning. I for one, am not in any hurry to fill that void with words that will only, can only echo back my own experience of the world.
Humans make tools and create things, so its easy for us to think that something or someone must have created us. We create a mythology that explains our existence and we create it with concepts that reflect ourselves. Essentially, there's nothing wrong with that if you accept that the paradigm you've created is limited in value. However, once you establish it as absolute, what do you do when you are confronted by something, as you inevitably will be, that doesn't fit?
Neither religion nor morality should be regarded as transcendent and necessary, simply because something has to fill the vacuum that is at the heart of a conscious existence. My previous point (about the normative nature of morality) is precisely that there is no natural law.
We have this thing called life and have to improvise our way through it. There's no shame in that; and I prefer a life of attempting to deal with what is there, rather than what I feel ought to be there.
I disagree that we are all de facto moral beings: the problem with morality is that it declares as normal that which is actually normative. That is to say, the real world sometimes sucks big time, and morality attempts to spread a big blanket over this fact.
Hence the moralist tends to find himself saying "you shouldn't be doing that" an awful lot....
The Estonian people did something about it - during the war Estonians fought in the uniforms of the Red Army, in the uniforms of the Waffen SS, and in the uniforms of the Finnish Army.
That history needs to be dealt with. It is clear that the 'independence' of Estonia was fractured in a terrible way by WW2, but in these late capitalist, multinational days, the independence of all nations is nothing but an illusion. Estonia must deal with this fact, in the same way we all have to. Its just a shame that you have to do it whilst having a nation run by gangsters as your nearest and largest neighbour.
Uh... Since the jpg is titled Targa Florio would I be wrong in guessing that its a certain long circuit in Italy?
I think you have to see this within a fairly complex set of interests... There's no way its a simple binary argument. I've only done a little reading since this was posted, but even so its apparent that some of the disorder comes from a perception that Estonian nationalism is being used as a cover for fascist interests.
Largely, these complaints are coming from Russian sources, so you have to take it with a pinch of salt, but Tallinn has been a venue for SS reunions in the past. No big deal really, since many Estonians joined the Waffen SS not from fascist sympathy, but to fight the Red Army's incipient occupation. Devil and the deep blue sea... But this past does provide a touchstone for Estonian nationalists of a certain kind...
Its not clear cut, which is probably why the monument is being moved... To prevent it from being a focus for further disturbances (I'm being generous to the authorities here, due to lack of truly informed opinion on my part...). But frankly, if monuments aren't for bringing the tensions of society out into the open, what good are they? To remember the dead, certainly, but the dead don't walk our streets. Monuments are for the living, they form part of our political and social landscape. They shouldn't be hidden.
Its actually taken from a tourist video I found on Youtube... But here's some proper action from the circuit: last years GP
It is indeed Dundrod! Can you name where the picture was taken from too?
No... But if it helps anyone to narrow things down, note that we're driving on the left-hand side of the road...
Wouldn't argue with you on that....
No, my concern was just the nature of the nationalist problem with the monument, so thats an interesting history you tell about the coffins. Those details are missing from the linked news reports. In fact the reason given in the reports is that the grave wasn't respected in its current position (used as tram stop etc). Certainly adds spice to the mix...
How does a monument to a few men who fought fascism become a symbol of Soviet occupation?
To be honest, I understand how - Estonia has an unfortunate historical legacy in having been occupied by both fascists and communists. But having witnessed first-hand the resurgence of fascist groups in what was East Germany, the notion that it is nationalists who largely want the statue removed, rings a few alarm bells in my head.
To be honest, I understand how - Estonia has an unfortunate historical legacy in having been occupied by both fascists and communists. But having witnessed first-hand the resurgence of fascist groups in what was East Germany, the notion that it is nationalists who largely want the statue removed, rings a few alarm bells in my head.
Elgin, Illinois? No, I had to look that one up and found some fascinating stuff...
All hail, Cock-Eyed Brown, who raced at Elgin in 1915, and "After reaching the summit of Pikes Peak on July 17, 1913 without the aid of horses to pull him, W. W. Brown proceeded to drive up the steps of the Summit House to get his 1910 Buick Model 10 “Bear Cat” to the highest point on the mountain that he possibly could."
Can see why you thought it might be though...
I thought that might be the first guess, but no, its not.
Get along to a top fuel event if only to hear the noise first hand... Recordings just don't do the physical nature of it any justice. Drag racing is largely about huge amounts of waiting for something to happen, but I was quite unprepared for how engaging that five or six seconds of racing can be.
For your first event I'd also recommend going to a venue where you can walk about the pits and paddock freely. Being able to stand just a few feet away as one those things starts up is an experience in itself.
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG