Conversation with ar32h
(16:31:29) ar32h: Hey you!
(16:31:33) Frodwith: Hiya
(16:31:42) ar32h: what is up?
(16:31:48) Frodwith: Just got home
(16:31:50) Frodwith: book didn't come yet
(16:31:57) Frodwith: >:-|
(16:32:04) ar32h: perhaps the postman is reading it :-P
(16:32:09) Frodwith: feh.
(16:32:43) ar32h: It so happens that I just got home as well. (doing laundry before big trip)
(16:32:55) Frodwith: ah ha.
(16:33:16) ar32h: Oh, and I posted to slashdot. Got +5 within 30 seconds as well as 22 comments.
(16:33:25) ar32h: O:-)
(16:35:00) Frodwith: *heads out to slashdot to look*
(16:38:34) Frodwith: You're alarmingly pragmatic sometimes.
(16:38:55) ar32h: A. how so? B. But am I wrong?
(16:40:13) Frodwith: Militarization, it can be argued, is the root of the greatest atrocities (there's that word again) ever perpetrated by the human race.
(16:40:42) Frodwith: And yet, you can look on it quite favorably for its technological-improvement side-effects
(16:41:17) Frodwith: An arms race is the quickest way to innovation
(16:41:18) Frodwith: yes
(16:41:29) Frodwith: It's also the quickest way to the death of millions of people
(16:41:36) Frodwith: And innovation can be accomplished without war
(16:41:57) Frodwith: The slower gains are worth the savings in lives, as it were.
(16:51:17) ar32h: Do you think that I callously suggest that millions be killed through the childish game of brinkmanship known as mutually assured destruction?
I propose such a course because it must be done if billions are to be saved.
Do you remember what happened the last time the world empire fell?
A struggle prevents us from becoming lazy. The world will lapse into a dark age if this empire falls. It hapened last time. It will happen again. The time and conditions are right for it to happen in the next 500 years. I cannot bear the though of the world going through another dark age because some nations though that a life of slow, friendly, no-hurt-feelings development was desirable.
Peace is the most blessed of states, but it is also the most dangerous. Peace is good because life is easy. People can go to school without fear of being called off to war. A little peace is a good thing, but too much for too long will kill this age.
I tell you, we would all be using AOL if the Cold War had not happened.
(16:52:26) Frodwith: Grandiose and incomplete.
(16:52:37) ar32h: Splainy
(16:52:55) Frodwith: Flesh out your argument, provide some support, and don't try to sound like a poet?
(16:53:23) ar32h: You want a five page essay, huh?
(16:53:39) Frodwith: Length isn't really the issue so much as completeness.
(16:54:02) Frodwith: You don't need to prove trivialities, but your argument as it stands isn't convincing at all
(16:54:12) ar32h: why not?
(16:54:16) Frodwith: we need war because we need war
(16:54:18) Frodwith: is what it boils down to
(16:54:27) ar32h: Noo
(16:54:42) ar32h: We don't need war. We need the threat of war.
(16:55:12) Frodwith: The threat of war too easily becomes war.
(16:55:12) ar32h: War is icky. People die and money is wasted on bullets instead of brains.
(16:55:23) ar32h: Which is why it is delicate business.
(16:55:37) ar32h: And why war is simply diplomacy through other means.
(16:55:43) Frodwith: It would be much preferable if something other than war could be used to stimulate innovation.
(16:56:01) Frodwith: s/war/threat of war/g
(16:56:27) ar32h: More breast cancer runs? AIDS walks? Trivial clock speed improvements to processors?
(16:56:57) Frodwith: False alternatives. You leave out the possibility of a means which hasn't yet been thought of.
(16:57:40) ar32h: Abandon the best existing means for one that may exist, but has not been though of yet?
(16:57:59) Frodwith: Since the cost of the best existing means isn't worth the gains reaped, I see no alternative.
(16:58:31) Frodwith: A human life is priceless. How much more so are thousands?
(16:59:01) ar32h: A monk on the hills is serene in himself, but he will never touch the stars.
(16:59:20) Frodwith: The question must then be asked: need the stars be touched?
(16:59:35) Frodwith: I'd trade technology for peace in a heartbeat.
(16:59:44) Frodwith: Even assuming that were necessary.
(16:59:48) Frodwith: Which it is, perhaps, not.
(17:00:24) ar32h: Peace can only be achieved by changing the human mind in such a way as to render it inhuman.
(17:00:52) Frodwith: If by human you mean sinful, then you are correct.
(17:01:02) ar32h: Groups of people doubly so.
(17:01:11) Frodwith: That does not make their sin any more palatable.
(17:01:23) Frodwith: Or worthy of emulation.
(17:01:46) ar32h: King David was not permitted to build the temple because he had blood on his hands. He did, however, kill when God required it of him.
(17:02:55) ar32h: What he did was wrong. It was also necessary.
(17:03:07) Frodwith: Incorrect.
(17:03:12) Frodwith: What he did was not wrong.
(17:03:23) Frodwith: King David was not punished for following God's command.
(17:03:38) ar32h: He was punished for killing Uriah?
(17:03:47) Frodwith: Well, yes, but that has no bearing here.
(17:03:57) Frodwith: Assuming he was otherwise spotless.
(17:04:18) Frodwith: God wanted his temple to by holy, unstained by unclean acts.
(17:04:35) Frodwith: David was not wrong to follow God's commands, but he was then considered unclean.
(17:04:58) ar32h: There are cases when it is necessary to kill. Those who do so are then tainted in a way.
(17:05:25) Frodwith: Clearly it is the case that there are cases when it is necessary to kill; else God, who is perfect, would not do it.
(17:05:51) Frodwith: Clearly there are cases where God requires humans to kill other humans. The bible tells us this.
(17:06:11) Frodwith: The Bible is also quite clear on another point: it is a sin to kill except by God's direct command.
(17:06:27) ar32h: Nack
(17:07:07) ar32h: Well, sorta
(17:07:13) Frodwith: Depends on the meaning of direct.
(17:07:30) ar32h: There are standing commands to kill in certain patterns
(17:07:44) Frodwith: Under the mosaic law, that is correct.
(17:08:14) ar32h: I will go out on a limb here and say, yes, but under a more basic law.
(17:08:17) Frodwith: For instance, if a woman sleeps with a man not her husband, she is to be stoned to death.
(17:08:54) Frodwith: It is not a sin, then, to stone a woman to death to keep God's law.
(17:09:36) Frodwith: However, we are not part of the covenant God made with the Jewish people, and we are not under the Mosaic law.
(17:09:51) Frodwith: Thusly, to kill in adherence to it would not be killing at God's command.
(17:10:50) Frodwith: The lot of all of humankind since Christ is to be bound by a different covenant, and to follow a different law.
(17:11:11) Frodwith: That is the law of Christ: to love one's neighbor, and to love God.
(17:12:16) ar32h: Why would one have a sword?
(17:12:23) ar32h: or a gun?
(17:12:36) Frodwith: Since we are commanded to heed Christ and walk in his footsteps, and since there are no commandments from Christ that require us to kill of which I am aware, it is intrinsically impossible to kill at God's command.
(17:12:48) Frodwith: And thus always a sin to kill.
(17:14:01) ar32h: I recall a extension of the mosaic law (hate in heart=murder,) but I do not recall a suspension of the law. Fulfillment = made perfect, not overthrown.
(17:14:39) Frodwith: Will you contend that gentiles, pre-Christ, were bound by the Mosaic law?
(17:15:19) ar32h: No. They were not bound by said law. They were bound by the principles that the law was based on.
(17:15:44) ar32h: That distinction does not matter
(17:15:48) Frodwith: God made no covenant with the gentiles.
(17:15:58) Frodwith: How can it be said that they were bound by anything?
(17:17:08) ar32h: They were bound by what is in their being. There are laws which God follows. There are laws which all of us know because we were made in the pattern-likeness of God.
(17:18:02) ar32h: Everyone knows this law. We all try to break it because of our sin nature. That does not make the law any less real. It mearly induces many to misery and sorrow.
(17:18:46) Frodwith: Let us assume that the law is not suspended. How can you, as a Christian, break it in good conscience?
(17:18:57) ar32h: I cannot.
(17:19:12) ar32h: And it will live with me for the rest of my life if I do.
(17:19:12) Frodwith: Why, then, do you intentionally do so when you could easily avoid it?
(17:19:59) ar32h: Because A) it cannot be so easily avoided. and B) There are times when it is necessary to do what is wrong.
(17:20:43) Frodwith: Do you know any women who have slept with men other than their husbands? If so, why have you not seen to it that they were stoned to death? Why do you not keep the sabbath? Why do you not tithe to the Temple? Why do you not dig a hole with a stick and defecate into it etc. etc., as per the law?
(17:21:18) ar32h: That law does not bind me.
(17:21:22) ar32h: It has never bound me.
(17:21:29) Frodwith: Nor has it ever bound any Christian.
(17:21:33) ar32h: Were I born in -200 or +2000
(17:21:56) Frodwith: If you were a Jew pre-Christ, it certainly would bind you.
(17:22:25) ar32h: Except that I would have been a European barbarian
(17:22:48) ar32h: And as such, would have killed, and as such would have felt sorrow.
(17:23:12) Frodwith: And yet, it would not have been acceptable to God.
(17:23:24) Frodwith: It would still have been a sin.
(17:23:40) ar32h: And I sin every day. It cannot be avoided.
(17:23:44) Frodwith: The only condition under which it is not a sin to kill your fellow man is at God's command.
(17:23:52) Frodwith: And yet you should strive to avoid it at all cost.
(17:24:37) ar32h: I do not want to sin, but I do. Everyone does. It should be avoided, but there are times when it is necessary for we are not God and cannot always see the righteous way out of every situation.
(17:24:52) ar32h: God knows this.
(17:25:05) Frodwith: It is never acceptable to sin intentionally.
(17:25:43) ar32h: Do you think that most people rise up and say "how can I sin today?" Even so, most sin countless times before noon.
(17:25:59) Frodwith: Straw man, I never made that claim.
(17:26:12) ar32h: This entire discussion is a straw man
(17:26:13) Frodwith: To sin intentionally is to do something, aware that it is sinful.
(17:26:35) ar32h: So, to do something that is a sin without realizing that it is a sin makes it not a sin?
(17:26:44) Frodwith: No, it makes it an unintentional sin.
(17:27:13) Frodwith: If we are trying to be the best Christians that we can be, we cannot justify intentional sin.
(17:27:39) Frodwith: Ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it - a sin is still a sin.
(17:27:56) ar32h: The only way is to realize that we cannot ever hope to not sin and throw ones self at the mercy of God.
(17:28:03) Frodwith: And yet, we have Christ's sacrifice and thus forgiveness of sins.
(17:28:15) Frodwith: Sins, intentional or otherwise, are forgiven us.
(17:28:32) ar32h: And yet there is always a cost in our hearts
(17:28:44) ar32h: God forgives us. We cannot forgive ourselves.
(17:28:50) Frodwith: It would, however, be ungrateful in the extreme to sin intentionally, just because we can.
(17:28:57) ar32h: Of course
(17:29:08) Frodwith: We must avoid sin in any way possible.
(17:29:15) Frodwith: We will still fail, because we are not perfect.
(17:29:21) Frodwith: But we must try.
(17:29:43) ar32h: By selling all our land and moving to the mountains where we shall all become ascetics.
(17:29:48) ar32h: :-P
(17:30:07) Frodwith: The life of an ascetic is not inherantly less sinful than yours.
(17:30:17) ar32h: Indeed
(17:30:22) Frodwith: It is not sinful to enjoy life, for instance.
(17:30:29) Frodwith: It is sinful only to break God's commands.
(17:30:50) Frodwith: Since one of them is to be happy, one could easily argue that an ascetic is more sinful than you.
(17:31:08) Frodwith: Unless, of course, being an ascetic makes him happy.
(17:31:20) Frodwith: But then he would not be able to spread the gospel, another of God's commands.
(17:32:19) ar32h: ... And one day my heart will win over my mind and I shall sell all I have to give to the poor and join the Jesuit order. Then I shall spend my says in quiet meditation upon the grace of God^^^^^Be a champion of justice by fomenting wars in central America...
(17:32:33) ar32h: s/says/days/
(17:33:05) ar32h: Either way, I still maintain that this entire discussion has been a straw man with a slippery slope lead-in.
(17:33:18) ar32h: I have not advocated killing anyone anywhere.
(17:34:17) ar32h: There is nothing wrong with preparing for war, unless you are preparing because you intend to start one.
(17:35:09) ar32h: I believe that it was one of the old Chinese guys who said "To maintain the peace you must prepare for war"
(17:35:09) Frodwith: There is nothing wrong with preparing for a war unless you are preparing to fight one.
(17:35:19) Frodwith: Sun Tzu, probably?
(17:35:24) ar32h: Prolly
(17:35:30) ar32h: Or Lao
(17:37:05) ar32h: I'd even say that there is nothing wrong with waging a war provided that you were attacked first. This is based on the belief that the teachings of Christ show that one should not fight to defend himself, but that there is nothing wrong with fighting to defend others.
(17:37:44) Frodwith: A belief that I do not share.
(17:38:37) Frodwith: It seems to be a commonly held belief that killing in the defense of the defenseless is just and acceptable, but I don't find that anywhere in the gospel, myself.
(17:40:52) ar32h: Why were the disciples told to buy and carry weapons?
(17:41:18) Frodwith: Why is the sky blue?
(17:41:43) ar32h: Because of the way that light refracts among water molecules.
(17:41:53) Frodwith: My point being that even if I had an answer to that question, which I may or may not, it isn't relevant to the discussion.
(17:43:02) ar32h: It is relevant, and makes all the difference in the world.
Either he told them to acquire weapons as a deterrent, but never to be used. In which case I win.
Or he told them to acquire weapons to use, in which case you lose.
(17:44:01) Frodwith: False alternatives. He may have told them to acquire weapons so that he could point out that they weren't to use them.
(17:44:12) Frodwith: Or any number of other reasons.
(17:44:42) ar32h: Unlikely. Why spend money on something that was unnecessary. The equipment that they were to have was very minimal/
(17:45:04) Frodwith: Why did he tell the samaritan woman to bring up water from the well? Either he wanted to drink it, or he wanted to piss in it. Either way, it would be treating a woman with disrepect. Therefore, Jesus did not respect women.
(17:46:08) ar32h: Both answers are out of character. Besides, his act of spending time speaking with her showed a great deal of respect.
(17:46:31) Frodwith: Perhaps he was using it as an object lesson, then.
(17:46:58) ar32h: And what other lesson do you draw from being told to purchase and carry arms?
(17:48:09) Frodwith: I suppose if he had wished all good Christians to carry swords or other lethal weapons, then I wouldn't have much of a leg to stand on
(17:48:29) Frodwith: I don't read it that way, though, oddly.
(17:49:19) Frodwith: For instance, he could have been pointing out that following him was dangerous.
(17:49:49) ar32h: He also rebuked the only one who ever used a weapon.
(17:50:14) Frodwith: Which he would not have been able to do if he hadn't had a weapon.
(17:50:41) ar32h: Which you could claim was the entire purpose of them acquiring weapons.
(17:50:45) Frodwith: What were the two swords "enough" for?
(17:50:59) Frodwith: Enough for the lesson?
(17:51:17) Frodwith: Seems likely to me. Certainly not enough to hold off a bunch of roman infantrymen.
(17:51:41) ar32h: indeed
(17:52:56) ar32h: All of these things are irrelevant to the original point. You say that Christianity expressly forbids killing. (I believe that to be restricted to murder, but that is another thing.)
I do not disagree that it is wrong to kill.
I do argue that there is nothing wrong with making things that can be used to make killing easier.
(17:53:31) Frodwith: I don't think they're irrelevant at all.
(17:54:01) Frodwith: The purpose of the argument was to show that killing is wrong.
(17:54:18) Frodwith: Which I have established to my satisfaction, at least.
(17:54:37) Frodwith: Making killing easier is a convenient way to dodge the issue, I think.
(17:54:56) Frodwith: "I didn't actually pull the trigger, I just made the gun and gave the orders."
(17:55:08) ar32h: Giving the orders is even wrong.
(17:55:13) Frodwith: Oh, agreed.
(17:55:31) ar32h: Making better milling machines that in turn make better triggers is not wrong.
(17:55:32) Frodwith: Making something whose sole intent is to facilitate killing is, I think, an extension of the same principle.
(17:55:40) ar32h: Negative.
(17:55:52) Frodwith: The better milling machines, perhaps not.
(17:55:57) Frodwith: Exploding bullets, yes.
(17:56:00) ar32h: One is a act of creation, the other distruction.
(17:56:40) ar32h: Exploding bullets are fascinating. They would be good for taking out snakes and such if your hands were shaking. Same thing with shotguns.
(17:57:58) Frodwith: Ah, well, in that case it's a matter of motive.
(17:58:12) Frodwith: And if your intent truly was to help you with your snake problem, prolly fine.
(17:58:17) ar32h: Following that slippery slope leads to not getting out of bed in the morning because buying gas means you pay a tax, which funds civic development, which attracted a machinest, who builds bullet casings, which make bullets, which may be used to kill people or get dinner.
(17:58:35) ar32h: The intent of the person who pulls the trigger is the only thing that matters
(17:58:55) Frodwith: Oversimplification. Knowingly aiding a murder makes you just as guilty as the murderer.
(18:00:15) ar32h: Does the gunsmith at armalite know that that the gun will be used by the military to kill people or by the game warden to kill a rabid raccoon?
(18:00:23) Frodwith: Nope.
(18:00:44) Frodwith: Unless, of course, he's manufacturing ak47s that he's going to then sell to the military.
(18:01:28) ar32h: who will use them to help the poor central american country that is overrun with rabid raccoons.
(18:01:40) Frodwith: Of course. *flat look*
(18:01:48) ar32h: Yes, I'm being difficult.
(18:02:22) ar32h: Point is, only God and the Person who pulls the trigger know the heart of the shooter.
(18:02:58) Frodwith: Fair enough. One can still do one's best not to contribute to a murder, though, Mr. Just Following Orders
(18:03:26) ar32h: In which case it is Mr. Orders who shares equal blame.
(18:03:53) ar32h: It is one thing to supply what could possably be used as a murder weapon.
(18:04:27) Frodwith: Making hunting rifles != preparing for war. :)
(18:05:46) ar32h: so, how are the videos coming?
(18:06:20) Frodwith: Haven't had a chance to watch them since saturday, actually. Too busy having interesting conversations with red haired troublemakers.
(18:06:27) ar32h: sorry
(18:06:37) Frodwith: Sorry for what?
(18:06:53) Frodwith: Stimulating conversations are much more fun that dusty 20 year old video.
(18:07:14) ar32h: That is good to hear.
(18:07:37) Frodwith: How much does it cost you to do laundry over there?
(18:08:27) ar32h: $4. 1 per device use
(18:08:55) Frodwith: $1.00 for a load in the washer, $1.00 for the dryer?
(18:09:05) ar32h: yes
(18:09:13) Frodwith: Bah. $2.25 a load here.
(18:09:18) ar32h: ouch
(18:09:22) Frodwith: $1.00 for washer, $1.25 for dryer
(18:09:43) Frodwith: I was going to say you could bring your laundry over here.
(18:09:50) ar32h: Because it will be better for the landlord if you drip-dry your clothes on a line across the living room?
(18:09:56) ar32h: Well, I'm almost done as it is.
(18:10:15) ar32h: Running up and down stairs is a great way to form rebuttals :-)
(18:10:22) Frodwith: *laughs*
(18:10:55) Frodwith: I'm trying to think of an elegant way to do permutations of a list
(18:11:17) ar32h: Check every combination of list elements?
(18:11:25) Frodwith: Generate, yes.
(18:12:17) ar32h: Select list element, fork with element + list, recurse, return results
(18:12:19) ar32h: ?
(18:12:30) ar32h: ignore fork
(18:12:36) Frodwith: Yes, that's the idea
(18:12:44) Frodwith: I'm trying to think of a good way to write the functions though
(18:12:47) Frodwith: without being ugly
(18:14:12) ar32h: Use less code
(18:14:18) Frodwith: Snarf snarf.