Quote:
Getting back to things:
1) How can you rationalize that vengence, in the form of "eye for an eye" (which is what you were advocating, whether you want to recognize it or not) is a more suitable form of "checkmate" (to use your own analogy) than Keeper's form of passivity, without implying, presumptuously, that vengence always works? (Because it doesn't)
and 2) Are you implying that everyone that has the power to "judge, jury and execute" should exercise that right (or is that priviledge simply reserved for you) and, if so, what moral obligation do you, or anyone else for that matter, have to judge, jury and execute fairly and not simply to any twisted, biased standard that they may have, when doing so?[/b]
An eye for a eye always works. However like a game of chess the beggining and middle and end game are different depending on the circumstances.
Quote:
2) For someone who was looking around for people who don't "suck at the Socratic method," it's clear to see you failed to use it for the past few posts, now[/b]
Their is no clear guideline for the socratic method. I am questioning myself now.