It’s more than just “a man within range of vision”. Obviously we don’t have the full story here, but even in the text, there are specific behaviors that would, arguably, make a reasonable person suspect they were in imminent danger. Depending on the state, that is enough to trigger self-defense definition.

They had legitimate reason to believe they were in danger. Not assault at all.

I understand what they mean. I think this comes down to an exercise in semantics, and you are pushing the “country = home” analogy too literally.

Feelings of love and pride don’t need a pure rational root cause. They can exist in a more abstract sense, like in the case of “loving your home”. You can take pride/love in the work you do to clean your home, especially when realizing others will be living in it as well. I can “love” the earth, and want to take care of and respect it.

Love can be expressed in many different forms. I can both love my significant other and also love my parents. I think you can then extend this argument to loving something abstract, like earth, or your country, with a sort of rational basis being that I love my fellow humans and want to reduce suffering.

My point being that pride in one’s country is an artificial thing which you’ve been pushed into having from the outside and as such is a prime vector to manipulate you (and all it takes is to listen to politicians harp about the greatness of one’s country to see that it is indeed being used for that by some), not something natural like pride for you and those close to you and their deeds.

I don’t quite follow you here. To me, there is a difference between having love or pride in one’s country versus being nationalist. To me, the latter involves critical analysis and honesty about flaws, and working to fix those flaws. Nationalism on the other hand would be amount to uncritically supporting everything the country (or politician/government) does, which is I think what you are describing?

Also, how do you define what is “natural” vs “unnatural” pride?

Upvoted both of you

Typically I value comments based on argumentative strength and/or whether information provided adds value to discussion.

Strong arguments will be upvoted even if I disagree with the overall conclusion. And part of what makes arguments strong is civility and open-mindedness (in my opinion).

One can appreciate a strong argument, even if it goes against what they themselves believe.

Well said

Love that phrase…”love this country”.

What does it even mean? The citizens? The flag? The physical land and soil that encompasses “this country”? Love the government? If so, what about the government do you love? The governments policies? Laws? The constitution? The actual government employees? Which ones? The president? A combination? How is the combination divided?

Also, depending on the answer to the above, why? Because you were born here? You think it’s better than other countries? How are you defining “better”?

Stupid phrase imo.

I mean I think it’s the adults responsibility to make due diligent efforts to check, but if the minor continues to lie, is it really on the adult anymore? Unless there were glaring red flags that a reasonable person could suspect, I don’t believe the adult can be held responsible.

I have no idea how the law handles this, but from my understanding, “mens rea” (guilty mind) is required to prove criminal wrongdoing. There would be no “mens rea” proof here since the adult had to have willful intent to commit a crime.

I’m a fence ded

False dichotomy. Doesn’t have to be one or the other. It can be “more” under one party than with another.

How is it that SO MANY people literally can’t see past a false dichotomy logical fallacy? I swear every other fucking comment is like “Yuhh WELL it wouhda been the same under the LIBS” like some sort of “gotcha”.

The amount of people that desperately need a course in basic informal logic is beyond astounding.

I’m American. I’m so disappointed in my fellow Americans. And I’d wager around half of us feel similarly disgusted by these results.

Just know not all of us voted for this fascist. I have been trying to organize more and get my friends to organize against this. Clearly civil disobedience is needed, so I think organizing and donating to organizations that support anti-fascism would help.

Ah yes, the ol’ “if I don’t know something, then it MUST be X” argument.

Substitute X for whatever ya like! Demons, ghouls, demon ghouls…the possibilities are endless!

TF you on? Just because there weren’t immediate, drastic regime level changes doesn’t mean they went “exactly nowhere”.

There have been many changes at smaller levels not being reported in mainstream western media. Public pressure called for MANY local officials to step down along with changes in law that have already started effecting everyday life, and at least in Thailand, some pretty major changes in how public officials are held accountable via more expansive auditing channels, thereby increasing transparency.

Not everything is a fucking hollywood movie wherein you have some Hunger Games style uprising against the elite.

In fact, it’s fucking insulting hearing people who haven’t an ounce of global exposure beyond whatever 2 or 3 media sources they shove their heads into saying “those protesters got nothing accomplished”.

Never let anyone tell you protesting doesn’t work.

Tf is this shit

I’m a giant media conglomerate.

I have two facts that I intend to share in a neutral manner (and, for the case of this hypothetical, we will assume that “sharing knowledge in a 100% completely neutral, fact-based manner” is even possible).

I will call these Fact A and Fact B.

During the Super Bowl, I denote 30 seconds of airtime to Fact A, and denote only 5 seconds of airtime to Fact B.

Question: is this propaganda?

Can’t wait till AI can just learn and utilize my consciousness on my behalf. That way I don’t need to exist.

Bruh you do understand House Repubs were the ones who passed the bills that prevented Biden from stopping arms to israel right?

Also false dichotomy. Just because one side is “pro-something” doesn’t mean the other side is automatically the opposite.

I mean it’s possible yeah. But the point is that the professor should know this and, hopefully, modify the instructions for those with this specific accommodation.

Ideally, absolutely. That’s what makes the hallmarks of a great scientist.

In practice, institutionalized science can be just as dogmatic and closed-minded as some of the worst religions.

I have had advisors/coworkers/management straight up ignore certain evidence because it didn’t fit their preconceived views of what the results “should be”. This doesn’t make the process of science objective anymore when people are crafting experiments in ways to fit their views, or cherry picking data that conforms to their views.

And you would be surprised at how often this happens in very high-stakes science industries (people’s lives are at stake). It’s fucking disgusting, and extremely dangerous.