wazua Tue, Jun 23, 2026
Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Log In

4 Pages«<234
Tolerating the Children of Darkness
Options
Previous Topic · Next Topic
tycho
#31 Posted : Tuesday, March 24, 2015 11:12:50 AM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
And how did I shove Muriel?


Corruption is not a (secular) rational value. The least corrupt countries evidently do not have it as part of their rational values.

Hence 'Corruption could be a rational reaction to an unfair or inefficient and ineffective system.' is not true.

A rational reaction has been, ought to be fixing the system. History has a role in the fixing of these systems. It is neigh impossible to adjust these systems now. The present is the product of the past and unless the past is changed, or the present wholly supplanted there is nothing to be done. They are cast in concrete. So the only subsequent matter is choosing which side one sees fit to be in. Hence my question why your choice?

Your discrimination against my question shoved.


I see you've presented an argument against the rationality of corruption. That's good.

But the matter was the question of tycho shoving. And you're saying I discriminated against a question you asked. Am interested to know which question and how did I discriminate?

And how does discrimination amount to shoving?
Back to top
  |
Muriel
#32 Posted : Tuesday, March 24, 2015 11:43:05 AM
Rank: Member

Joined: 11/19/2009
Posts: 3,142
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
And how did I shove Muriel?


Corruption is not a (secular) rational value. The least corrupt countries evidently do not have it as part of their rational values.

Hence 'Corruption could be a rational reaction to an unfair or inefficient and ineffective system.' is not true.

A rational reaction has been, ought to be fixing the system. History has a role in the fixing of these systems. It is neigh impossible to adjust these systems now. The present is the product of the past and unless the past is changed, or the present wholly supplanted there is nothing to be done. They are cast in concrete. So the only subsequent matter is choosing which side one sees fit to be in. Hence my question why your choice?

Your discrimination against my question shoved.


I see you've presented an argument against the rationality of corruption. That's good.

But the matter was the question of tycho shoving. And you're saying I discriminated against a question you asked. Am interested to know which question and how did I discriminate?

And how does discrimination amount to shoving?


Why cast your lot with the children of darkness?
Back to top
  |
tycho
#33 Posted : Tuesday, March 24, 2015 11:48:08 AM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
If that's the question, then how have I discriminated against it?
Back to top
  |
Muriel
#34 Posted : Tuesday, March 24, 2015 12:06:45 PM
Rank: Member

Joined: 11/19/2009
Posts: 3,142
tycho wrote:
If that's the question, then how have I discriminated against it?


You are still shoving. Please stop.
Back to top
  |
tycho
#35 Posted : Tuesday, March 24, 2015 12:10:35 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Muriel, I'd like to respond to your argument about the rationality of corruption, even though I have serious doubts as to whether this conversation is supposed to be a healthy learning experience.

Rationality isn't necessarily something explicitly stated. Most of the time it's inferred. And one infallible test for rationality is adaptation and survival.

People and institutions use corruption to adapt to their environment and to survive. Otherwise corruption would have no value, and if corruption had no value, no one would bother with it.
Back to top
  |
tycho
#36 Posted : Tuesday, March 24, 2015 12:13:02 PM
Rank: Elder

Joined: 7/1/2011
Posts: 8,804
Location: Nairobi
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
If that's the question, then how have I discriminated against it?


You are still shoving. Please stop.


If shoving is asking for clarification and or stating contrary opinion without personal affront then I surrender.
Back to top
  |
Muriel
#37 Posted : Tuesday, March 24, 2015 2:26:47 PM
Rank: Member

Joined: 11/19/2009
Posts: 3,142
tycho wrote:
Muriel wrote:
tycho wrote:
If that's the question, then how have I discriminated against it?


You are still shoving. Please stop.


If shoving is asking for clarification and or stating contrary opinion without personal affront then I surrender.


This is a great controversy.
Back to top
  |
Muriel
#38 Posted : Friday, March 27, 2015 9:14:41 AM
Rank: Member

Joined: 11/19/2009
Posts: 3,142
tycho wrote:
Muriel, if you show me how I have been biased against the past then I can make amends.

For example, how have I not acknowledged it?


I just thought this would be interesting.

It is not meant to cast aspersions on the well meaning brothers and sisters who might feel an attachment to the institution. Its just a pointer that the past indeed has bearing on this issue in the light of the diagram I presented.

HOLY GRAFT [Part1]: Archbishop Zacchaeus Okoth of Kisumu swindles millions from Pope Francis
Back to top
  |
4 Pages«<234
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Wazua Club SK Theme
Powered by YAF | YAF © 2003-2009, Yet Another Forum.NET
Copyright © 2026 Wazua.co.ke. All Rights Reserved.