cookiecutter
Proceed to Ultraslamming
We should kill all children before they reach the age of 5. There would never be a school shooting again. It's fool proof.
Sturmgeist Press Release/ Finnish shootings
- Thread starter Doomtroll
- Start date
V.V.V.V.V.
Houses Ov Mercury
CoBHC247
The Impaler
Well said (mostly). The Netherlands, where I live, is a prime example of social tolerance taken to the extreme. Decade after decade the norms and guidelines for higher education as well as highschool level education are systematically adjusted downwards to make up for all the fuck-ups in society who are too stupid, but mostly too lazy, to succeed. As a result this country is on an educational level (though it goes for many western European social democracies) that is consistently lagging behind compared to those of for instance the United States and the United Kingdom.
It's just sad to see society constantly pandering to the lowest common denominator and that the notion that some people are simply born with more intelligence and potential than others has somehow become so offensive that it needs to be covered up by just handing out degrees to anyone who can just make it through 4 years of college or univeristy regardless of whether or not they show any real skill. It's more of an endurance race than anything to do with intellectual capacity really.
While that is hardly an excuse to shoot up schools (and may infact have nothing to do with this particular incident, I haven't really read much about it), it certainly is true that many intelligent people find themselves extremely frustrated by 'the system' at an early age.
Brilliant. See if you can figure out what the follow up question is going to be...
V.V.V.V.V.
Houses Ov Mercury
Yes, children can become frustrated, some enough to shoot up schools. However, what is the percentage of students who DON'T shoot up schools to the percentage of children who do? You should find a discrepancy here. The great majority of kids are NOT shooting up schools, yet probably a great majority find school to be oppressive. It cannot indubitably be the establishment's fault, then...it is a problem with an individual and should be treated as such.
This is so logically vacuous that I can't be bothered to respond further until you have bothered to gain some basic understanding of the situation. Or better, a basic understanding of sociology.
V.V.V.V.V.
Houses Ov Mercury
Wait...it's illogical to assume that since a greater amount of children are sane, the problem lies in the individual rather than a common establishment which all of them, at some point, attend? Call me a Christian then, because I must sure enjoy lacking logic...
cookiecutter
Proceed to Ultraslamming
Now THAT is terrible logic. He is saying that all children are exposed to schools, yet only a minute fraction have problems, therefore it is unlikely the problem lies with schools. Your analogy fails because most people are not exposed to nicotine. Those who are do get addicted. I hope you were joking.
Do you seriously know anyone older than 16 or so who hasn't tried a cigarette?
Mort Divine
Shrine Maiden of the In-Crowd
You're decidedly in the minority, then. You may, unlike most of your peers, even be a virgin. Who cares
cookiecutter
Proceed to Ultraslamming
V.V.V.V.V.
Houses Ov Mercury
Fail...
Now SOG is going to do his whole red herring thing, then resort to some ad hominems and not really provide any conclusive arguments which render my previous claims to be false.
Welcome to GMD.
Now SOG is going to do his whole red herring thing, then resort to some ad hominems and not really provide any conclusive arguments which render my previous claims to be false.
Welcome to GMD.
Your 'argument' was the assertion that, because most students don't shoot their classmates, there's nothing about our educational system contributing to these kinds of incidents. The logic is obviously faulty and in no way engages the issue raised in this thread. You might as well stuff your fingers in your ears, say "Nuh unh!" and hold your breath until everyone agrees...or not.
In theory, no it is fairly logical. If for every couple of million "sane" students going through the educational institutions there are only 2 or 3 who snap and shoot up their classrooms, then the system is doing its job and exceptions should be seen as just that: exceptions to the rule, isolated incidents. But I think the inevitable flaw there is the process by which the population is sharply divided into the "sane" and "insane" categories. "Insane" is anyone who goes on murderous killing spree, and "sane" is everyone else, which is probably 99.999% of the population. If you instead take a sliding scale approach, the question goes from "are you sane?" into "how sane are you?", and that takes into account the more benign social and mental impairments of the sane population: depression, bipolar disorders, phobias, ADD, etc.
Doctors and scientists seem to get really trigger-happy with diagnosing that kind of shit these days. Just think about how many fairly normal people you know who get treated for or more of those kind of problems. Some of it may be genetics, but my guess is a lot of it also is the person's environment (aka nature vs. nurture), and my point in mentioning all of this is that it might be worth considering that the social and environmental maladjustments that affect high school mass murderers may be just be much more extreme cases of the same problems that also affect so many of us. The rest of us just express our frustrations in more harmless ways. If, for the sake of argument, these problems are indeed caused by the school system, then viewing school violence as just one reaction to an array of issues that affect most of us to different degrees may help to understand how this behavior starts in the first place and mitigate the problem.
Similar threads
