My mistake and understandable given what paligap had written to you in post # 347852: Feser seems to in the forefront of a bit of an Aristotelian renaissance that we are seeing at the moment. I'm sure Robin's a fan. But as a Catholic conservative, I rather think you will dislike some of his political/social ideas.
Back to my original question: did you and your sister ever engage in physical fighting? ________________________________ From: authfriend <authfri...@yahoo.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 11:06 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: compassion --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@...> wrote: > > Ah, Judy, skirting the crucial issues of universal wrong > doing and thus the appropriateness of universal compassion . Nothing wrong with universal compassion. What made you think I believe it's not appropriate? > But more importantly, this is an example of what I call your > dirty fighting. Denying what you probably know to be true. Oh? Let's see: > Meaning, a friend of yours here recently referred to you as > conservative Catholic. You did not correct him. Was he being > ironic? I'm not aware of anyone ever having referred to me as a "conservative Catholic." If anyone had, I would have corrected them with a hoot of laughter. Would you care to quote the post in question? I strongly suspect you've gotten something very fouled up in your mind. > Anyway, if he is and you're not CC, perhaps in your > philosophical readings you've heard of "the age of reason." > That would be, according to the Catholic Church of the 50s, > age 7, right? Age 7 in those days was when children first > received the sacrament of Penance or Confession, now called > Reconciliation I think. It involves confessing sins, > receiving and doing penance. One assumes from this that the > Church deems children as young as 7 as able to know the > difference between right and wrong. Do you think the > Catholic Church wrong? I would certainly disagree with the premise that children are endowed with an adult sense of right and wrong by the age of seven, and I'd be very surprised if that was indeed Catholic dogma. My uninformed guess is that the sacrament is introduced at this point as a way of calling children's attention to the fact that there *is* a distinction between right and wrong and helping them begin to understand it and to take responsibility for avoiding wrongdoing. > More to the point, are you still saying that you and your > sister never had a physical fight at some point in your > life? I never said that. I would say that it's you who is engaging in the "dirty fighting" you attribute to me here, except that you're obviously such a dimwit you don't even know that's what you're doing. > ________________________________ > From: authfriend <authfriend@...> > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2013 8:26 PM > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: compassion > > > >  > And now we know for sure that the way you post on FFL > is an exception to your theories on compassion. > > No surprise there. I just wanted you to demonstrate that > for us, and you've done so very effectively. > > (P.S.: What's the difference, in your mind, between "silly" > and "dumb"? My dictionary defines "dumb" as "lacking > intelligence" and "silly" as "weak in intellect." I'm just > not sure which to call the inclusion of children in your > "hate the wrongdoing, have compassion for the wrongdoer" > formula, since children aren't generally considered to have > a clear idea of right and wrong. One would *think*, with > regard to that formula, that "at some point in our lives" > would mean at some point after we've developed a sense of > right and wrong.) > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote: > > > > No Judy, I wouldn't expect you to be at all interested in any post that was > > about universal compassion. Your compassion seems limited to one person in > > particular and maybe 2 or 3 others. And I wouldn't say it was silly of you > > to think I was talking about adults. I'd say it was dumb, since my sentence > > read: My guess is we've all done wrong and or stupid stuff at some point > > in our lives. At some point in our lives would include childhood and teen > > years, now wouldn't it? > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: authfriend <authfriend@> > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2013 5:46 PM > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: compassion > > > > > > > >  > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote: > > > > > > Jeez, what a saint you've been Judy. You mean to tell me > > > that you and your sister never got into any hair pulling > > > fights?! > > > > Oh, I thought you were talking about adults. Silly me. > > > > > Anyway, I simply meant that if A is being hurt by B, then > > > it's A's responsibility to remove himself or herself from > > > B's presence. > > > > So that's what you meant by "Don't allow [the wrongdoer] > > to continue wrong doing"? I see. > > > > > Otherwise it's society's responsibility to > > > put wrong doers in circumstances where they can't harm > > > those weaker than them. > > > > So you *aren't* talking about FFL, just as I thought. > > This was all an idea you had, completely unrelated to > > anything going on here, that you thought we would find > > of interest. > > > > Right. > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: authfriend <authfriend@> > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Sunday, June 30, 2013 2:40 PM > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: compassion > > > > > > > > > > > >  > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Share Long <sharelong60@> wrote: > > > > > > > > My guess is we've all done wrong and or stupid stuff at some point > > > > in our lives including lying and physically hurting others even > > > > those we love. So I vote for pragmatic and universal compassion. > > > > Just to be clear, by pragmatic compassion I don't mean the allowing > > > > of abuse. I mean something along the lines of hate the wrong doing, > > > > have compassion for the wrong doer but don't allow them to continue > > > > wrong doing. > > > > > > I guess you're not talking about FFL, then, huh? Unless > > > you have some magical formula that prevents wrongdoers > > > from continuing their wrongdoing. > > > > > > As to "physically hurting others," I suggest you speak for > > > yourself. My own guess is that most of us have managed to > > > avoid physical violence, to those we love as well as to > > > those we don't. > > > > > > > For yourself, steer clear of abusive behavior and do what's > > > > necessary to protect those who aren't able to protect themselves. > > > > > >
