It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Put Up Or Shut Up, Extremist Idealogues!

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 01:20 PM
There is only one extreamist view that I know of that you cannot say is wrong. No matter what you think.

That is the extream views of the religous zealot. Basicly the belief that this person or group of people hold that anyone not believing or following their God or way is wrong and if you don't change you are going to be condemened to eternal damnation. Period.

You yourself can say they are crazy, warped and purely closed minded. You can even say they are wrong. But that is your belief, faith, or conviction. So as of yet no living person can prove they are wrong. The only ABSOLUTE way to know is by dying. Not dying for a minute or two and being brought back, but dead, six feet under dead. Even then you may not "find out" anything because it could just be over as in NOTHING. I cannot even fathom what absolutly nothing is.

Not my belief because I don't know what to think about whether there is a God or not but this is the only extream view I could think of that could not be proven or disproven.

[edit on 12/4/2004 by just_a_pilot]

posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 04:08 PM
I guess I should point out why I started this thread. I wanted something interesting to help inaugurate the "Slug-Fest" forum, and this seemed to fill the bill. And indeed, I think it does.

What better topic for a battleground among extremists than the topic of extremism itself?

So I hung the strawman of the "extremist idealogue" out there to see who would bite, and I must say, I am impressed with the results. Clearly, there are some strongly-held beliefs among most of the contributors to this thread, which is excellent.

I must say that I already find this thread both intriguing and informative, which is never a bad thing, so please keep it up!

But I want to throw out these questions, to satisfy my own curiosity:

1) Are you an extremist idealogue?

2) If you are an extremist idealogue, why do you define yourself that way?

3) If you are not an extremist idealogue, why did you respond to this thread in the first place?

Oh, and for those worried about my "taking a pummeling", I say: fuhgettaboutit. The first rule of a fist fight is: Be able to take a punch.

Also, I find the decorum I am seeing in this thread to be both encouraging and inspiring. No reason we can't play by Marquis of Queensbury Rules, you know.

Jolly good show, and whatnot!

posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 04:13 PM
Ooops my fault for not recognizing that you were looking for extreamists. My post was about the only extreamist view that I thought could not be disproven.

Sorry 'bout that.

posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 05:36 PM
Majic - I'm no extremist, but I posted in this thread for positive reinforcement. I thought you could use the help.

posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 06:18 PM
the thing is, i don't consider myself an extremist, but I DO consider myself radical in my ideas. As I understand it, extremist in this case means 'refusing to accept logical arguments to the contrary of the held belief', which is not me at all. Is this what you meant by extremism?

posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 08:31 PM

Fighting is not done very well without throwing a punch, and that is where many of the moderates sit. Wishing to have equal rights, but not standing up with the extremists for those rights. You have described moderatism in a way that is self-defeating; people have desires on an issue, but will not request things to be changed in a fundamental way. As I said before, moderates have and will continue to sit on the heels of the extremists that fight for them.

The truth stays the truth no matter time or new data. 1 will never be equal to anything other than 1, and as such some things do not need such references. If the ideological moderate wants to be "wishy-washy," depending on time and place, then they should be intellectually honest that they may contradict themselves (i.e. become hypocrites). This is not a pragmatic stance to have; not only are hypocrites looked down upon, but there is also an incentive for the moderate to be hesitant with their decisions when in real life important events are time sensitive.


Great way to start this forum!

I am not very sure what I am; I can put on a good face of most positions, but in reality I just like to argue. Intellectual stimulation caused by argument/debate interests me and is one of the factors I use to grow more as a person.

new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in