This is not saying anything that we don't know: wild animals are selfish and will do anything to achieve their biological imperative believing that ends justify the means. this barely constitutes a "stance" and there is virtually nothing about morality here because morality is a whole level (and a bunch of frontal cortex mass) above this. the author does not even explain why he believes what they say, so why even write the post
From the article:
Given the ever more obvious case that genocide is going on in Gaza, I had been thinking that Scott Aaronson’s going quiet on the issue meant that he was starting to realize that this had become indefensible. Turns out I was very wrong.
In his latest blog posting, he explains that the current situation in Gaza is analogous to an evil murderer kidnapping your child and strapping her to train tracks before an oncoming train. If you pull a lever to divert the train it will instead kill five of the murderer’s children. This situation provides for him a definition of Zionism:
> Zionism, to define it in one sentence, is the proposition that, in the situation described, you have not merely a right but a moral obligation to pull the lever—and that you can do so with your middle finger raised high to the hateful mob…
> Zionism, so defined, is the deepest moral belief that I have.
Scott formulates this as an abstract moral dilemma, but of course it’s about the very concrete question of what the state of Israel should do about the two million people in Gaza. Scott’s answer to this is clear: they want to kill us and our children, so we have to kill them all, children included. This is completely crazy, as is defining Zionism as this sort of genocidal madness.
This post got flagged and hidden, but I vouched for it because I think it's more interesting than just another political take. It's a historical record of a brilliant academic (one who I once followed and respected) slowly being pushed into accepting, and then embracing, a genocide.
> Suppose a man has already murdered most of your family, including several of your children, for no other reason than
...the fact that you have walled him and everyone he knows into an open-air prison, where nothing goes in or out without your approval, systematically keeping him, his family, his friends, his children, and everyone around him just this side of starvation, with no hope of release, for decades on end?
If I were him, I'd hurt you as hard as I possibly could, at every opportunity, with any means I could come by.
Israel has successfully conflated “being Jewish” with “embracing Israeli politics.” What a PR coup! I wonder, though, what they expect to happen when they lose their last remaining allies, as the world gapes in horror at the situation in Gaza. After all, most people have an intuitive sense that blasting a terrorist through their hostages is a morally indefensible action, unless you don’t really see the hostages as people.
6 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 22.3 ms ] threadFrom the article: Given the ever more obvious case that genocide is going on in Gaza, I had been thinking that Scott Aaronson’s going quiet on the issue meant that he was starting to realize that this had become indefensible. Turns out I was very wrong.
In his latest blog posting, he explains that the current situation in Gaza is analogous to an evil murderer kidnapping your child and strapping her to train tracks before an oncoming train. If you pull a lever to divert the train it will instead kill five of the murderer’s children. This situation provides for him a definition of Zionism:
> Zionism, to define it in one sentence, is the proposition that, in the situation described, you have not merely a right but a moral obligation to pull the lever—and that you can do so with your middle finger raised high to the hateful mob…
> Zionism, so defined, is the deepest moral belief that I have.
Scott formulates this as an abstract moral dilemma, but of course it’s about the very concrete question of what the state of Israel should do about the two million people in Gaza. Scott’s answer to this is clear: they want to kill us and our children, so we have to kill them all, children included. This is completely crazy, as is defining Zionism as this sort of genocidal madness.
Source: https://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=15191
Thanks for all your thoughtful, level-headed and incredibly patient replies!
...the fact that you have walled him and everyone he knows into an open-air prison, where nothing goes in or out without your approval, systematically keeping him, his family, his friends, his children, and everyone around him just this side of starvation, with no hope of release, for decades on end?
If I were him, I'd hurt you as hard as I possibly could, at every opportunity, with any means I could come by.