<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
	<channel>
		<title>KHInsider Forums - Intel</title>
		<link>http://forums.khinsider.com</link>
		<description>Carry on intelligent discussions regarding politics, world issues, etc.</description>
		<language>en</language>
		<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 23:16:05 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>vBulletin</generator>
		<ttl>60</ttl>
		
		<item>
			<title>Report - Catholic Church enabled and defended child abuse for at least three decades</title>
			<link>http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/139422-report-catholic-church-enabled-defended-child-abuse-least-three-decades.html</link>
			<pubDate>Sat, 28 Nov 2009 05:44:24 GMT</pubDate>
			<description><![CDATA[t's official - in case you didn't already know. The report investigating a sample of 46 priests has confirmed that all four Archbishops of Dublin during the 1960s to 1980s were guilty of the "pre-occupations in dealing with cases of child sexual abuse, at least until the mid 1990s, were the maintenance of secrecy, the avoidance of scandal, the protection of the reputation of the Church, and the preservation of its assets. All other considerations, including the welfare of children and justice for victims, were subordinated to these priorities."

BBC News - Irish Church accused of abuse cover-up (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8381119.stm)

The individual crimes that the Catholic Church defended range from processing child pornography to rape. One priest confessed to abusing over 100 children, another said he abused a child every two weeks for 25 years.

Pretty damning evidence for the evil of the Church.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>t's official - in case you didn't already know. The report investigating a sample of 46 priests has confirmed that all four Archbishops of Dublin during the 1960s to 1980s were guilty of the &quot;pre-occupations in dealing with cases of child sexual abuse, at least until the mid 1990s, were the maintenance of secrecy, the avoidance of scandal, the protection of the reputation of the Church, and the preservation of its assets. All other considerations, including the welfare of children and justice for victims, were subordinated to these priorities.&quot;<br />
<br />
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8381119.stm" target="_blank">BBC News - Irish Church accused of abuse cover-up</a><br />
<br />
The individual crimes that the Catholic Church defended range from processing child pornography to rape. One priest confessed to abusing over 100 children, another said he abused a child every two weeks for 25 years.<br />
<br />
Pretty damning evidence for the evil of the Church.</div>

]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/">Intel</category>
			<dc:creator>Azrael</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/139422-report-catholic-church-enabled-defended-child-abuse-least-three-decades.html</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Garrett Hardin on why charity is wrong</title>
			<link>http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/139102-garrett-hardin-why-charity-wrong.html</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:27:47 GMT</pubDate>
			<description><![CDATA[For my PHIL class, I was assigned to read Garrett Hardin's Lifeboat Ethics: the Case Against Helping the Poor:

http://www.garretthardinsociety.org/...ping_poor.html

I thought it might make for a nice discussion here too.

So what are your thoughts on this page?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>For my PHIL class, I was assigned to read Garrett Hardin's Lifeboat Ethics: the Case Against Helping the Poor:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.garretthardinsociety.org/...ping_poor.html" target="_blank">http://www.garretthardinsociety.org/...ping_poor.html</a><br />
<br />
I thought it might make for a nice discussion here too.<br />
<br />
So what are your thoughts on this page?</div>

]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/">Intel</category>
			<dc:creator>Azrael</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/139102-garrett-hardin-why-charity-wrong.html</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>This is why net neutrality is important.</title>
			<link>http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/138668-why-net-neutrality-important.html</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 18:18:42 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>Imagine the following scenario:

Image: http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/8696/neutrality.png 

Would you be willing to pay a monthly rate (subscription) to view your favorite websites or use online services?

What would you propose otherwise to counter the massive cost of bandwidth to support these sites and services?</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>Imagine the following scenario:<br />
<br />
<img src="http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/8696/neutrality.png" border="0" alt="" /><br />
<br />
Would you be willing to pay a monthly rate (subscription) to view your favorite websites or use online services?<br />
<br />
What would you propose otherwise to counter the massive cost of bandwidth to support these sites and services?</div>

]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/">Intel</category>
			<dc:creator>Shamdeo</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/138668-why-net-neutrality-important.html</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[2012! [intel suba-section]]]></title>
			<link>http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/138500-2012-intel-suba-section.html</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 03:07:15 GMT</pubDate>
			<description><![CDATA[december 14 or 17 or something like that mayan's predict the world will end ect ect. blah ect. you know the story ect.

SO.

KHi.

lets talk.

about what YOU think about this "issue' or "prediction" or w/e you want to call it

i think ill make two threads on this.

one in this section

and one in discussion

cuz like, a lot of ppl/noobs might also want to comment on this stuff, and some might not be intel enough to post here [like me! plus ill probably post in the discussion thread >~> or like whoever has a better discussion going on :D]

if theres a thread on this i am deeply sorry ok]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>december 14 or 17 or something like that mayan's predict the world will end ect ect. blah ect. you know the story ect.<br />
<br />
SO.<br />
<br />
KHi.<br />
<br />
lets talk.<br />
<br />
about what YOU think about this &quot;issue' or &quot;prediction&quot; or w/e you want to call it<br />
<br />
i think ill make two threads on this.<br />
<br />
one in this section<br />
<br />
and one in discussion<br />
<br />
cuz like, a lot of ppl/noobs might also want to comment on this stuff, and some might not be intel enough to post here [like me! plus ill probably post in the discussion thread &gt;~&gt; or like whoever has a better discussion going on :D]<br />
<br />
if theres a thread on this i am deeply sorry ok</div>

]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/">Intel</category>
			<dc:creator>Aqua.</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/138500-2012-intel-suba-section.html</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Educational Television</title>
			<link>http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/138445-educational-television.html</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 02:50:40 GMT</pubDate>
			<description><![CDATA[Is there really any benefit? All I have seen it do is get kids to sing annoying songs which have nothing to do with education.. In fact some of these things seem counter productive.. WordWorld - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WordWorld)
The methods used in this show has made my little brother start stuttering out every word (which he didn't before) due to the way it sounds out the first part of the word every time.
Is this fusion of information and entertainment really working at all? Could this have serious consequences in educational development?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>Is there really any benefit? All I have seen it do is get kids to sing annoying songs which have nothing to do with education.. In fact some of these things seem counter productive.. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WordWorld" target="_blank">WordWorld - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</a><br />
The methods used in this show has made my little brother start stuttering out every word (which he didn't before) due to the way it sounds out the first part of the word every time.<br />
Is this fusion of information and entertainment really working at all? Could this have serious consequences in educational development?</div>

]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/">Intel</category>
			<dc:creator>Azrael</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/138445-educational-television.html</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Moral relativism</title>
			<link>http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/138399-moral-relativism.html</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:22:12 GMT</pubDate>
			<description><![CDATA[As promised in the Machiavelli thread.

I consider myself a moral relativist, in that I believe there's no such thing as objective morality. This is a direct result of the fact that I'm an atheist, as barring a set of arbitrary rules imposed by an external power, I am unable to reconcile the fact that everyone has differing views on morality with the possibility of an objective moral standard. 

In my eyes, "good" can never exist as an absolute concept. Because if it does, how do we know whose idea of "good" is right? Morality stems directly from our value systems, and value systems vary wildly. To me, human life is more valuable than retribution, no matter the circumstances - but plenty of people would disagree. I believe the death penalty is morally wrong. The next guy believes it's okay to humanely execute a serial murderer. The guy after that believes it's okay to stone a teenage girl to death for adultery if she's raped. Sure, I think the other guys' views are abhorrent - but objectively, what gives me the right to judge their moral standards by my own? In their eyes, I'm the immoral one for my leniency on murderers or defiled women. 

When I admitted to being a moral relativist a while back, someone pointed out that given the premise that moral values are subjective, they come to hold no more objective weight than a preference for strawberries over chocolate. He said, "So all you can do is convince or condition others that strawberries are preferable to chocolate. But you cannot fault anyone for liking the taste of chocolate over strawberries. To fault them there has to be some overarching standard from which we can logically deduce that strawberries are preferable to chocolate for everyone. Otherwise, to talk of fault is meaningless."

I have a feeling that this quote was meant to point out an inherent flaw in the idea of moral relativism. To me, it doesn't. To me, it explains my worldview. My response was simply this: that the guy was absolutely right. I cannot fault someone for doing something they honestly believe is right, no matter how despicable I myself consider their actions to be. 

It's at about this point that people start accusing me of being a moral nihilist. But just because I don't believe morality can exist as a universal, objective concept, doesn't mean it can't exist as a local and subjective concept. Local in the sense of the moral consensus of a given society at a given time; local in the sense of an individual's personal moral beliefs. People raised in the same country in the same time period tend to grow up with similar value systems and therefore come to similar collective decisions regarding morality, so certain actions can definitely be considered immoral by a certain society and its set of values. And I personally have very strong views on morality.

I just don't presume to consider them more objectively valid than anyone else's.

I'd be curious to hear how - without invoking a higher power - one justifies the idea of moral absolutism. The idea, for example, that killing a human is always wrong, no matter the circumstances. Because I believe that even killing can be not only morally right but morally imperative if, say, it's the only way to prevent someone launching a nuke at a populated area.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>As promised in the Machiavelli thread.<br />
<br />
I consider myself a moral relativist, in that I believe there's no such thing as objective morality. This is a direct result of the fact that I'm an atheist, as barring a set of arbitrary rules imposed by an external power, I am unable to reconcile the fact that everyone has differing views on morality with the possibility of an objective moral standard. <br />
<br />
In my eyes, &quot;good&quot; can never exist as an absolute concept. Because if it does, how do we know whose idea of &quot;good&quot; is right? Morality stems directly from our value systems, and value systems vary wildly. To me, human life is more valuable than retribution, no matter the circumstances - but plenty of people would disagree. I believe the death penalty is morally wrong. The next guy believes it's okay to humanely execute a serial murderer. The guy after that believes it's okay to stone a teenage girl to death for adultery if she's raped. Sure, <i>I</i> think the other guys' views are abhorrent - but objectively, what gives me the right to judge <i>their</i> moral standards by my own? In their eyes, <i>I'm</i> the immoral one for my leniency on murderers or defiled women. <br />
<br />
When I admitted to being a moral relativist a while back, someone pointed out that given the premise that moral values are subjective, they come to hold no more objective weight than a preference for strawberries over chocolate. He said, &quot;So all you can do is convince or condition others that strawberries are preferable to chocolate. But you cannot fault anyone for liking the taste of chocolate over strawberries. To fault them there has to be some overarching standard from which we can logically deduce that strawberries are preferable to chocolate for everyone. Otherwise, to talk of fault is meaningless.&quot;<br />
<br />
I have a feeling that this quote was meant to point out an inherent flaw in the idea of moral relativism. To me, it doesn't. To me, it explains my worldview. My response was simply this: that the guy was absolutely right. I cannot fault someone for doing something they honestly believe is right, no matter how despicable I myself consider their actions to be. <br />
<br />
It's at about this point that people start accusing me of being a moral nihilist. But just because I don't believe morality can exist as a universal, objective concept, doesn't mean it can't exist as a <i>local</i> and <i>subjective</i> concept. Local in the sense of the moral consensus of a given society at a given time; local in the sense of an individual's personal moral beliefs. People raised in the same country in the same time period tend to grow up with similar value systems and therefore come to similar collective decisions regarding morality, so certain actions can definitely be considered immoral by a certain society and its set of values. And I <i>personally</i> have very strong views on morality.<br />
<br />
I just don't presume to consider them more objectively valid than anyone else's.<br />
<br />
I'd be curious to hear how - without invoking a higher power - one justifies the idea of moral absolutism. The idea, for example, that killing a human is <i>always</i> wrong, no matter the circumstances. Because I believe that even killing can be not only morally right but morally <i>imperative</i> if, say, it's the only way to prevent someone launching a nuke at a populated area.</div>

]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/">Intel</category>
			<dc:creator>krexia</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/138399-moral-relativism.html</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Lost in Translation</title>
			<link>http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/138147-lost-translation.html</link>
			<pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:06:14 GMT</pubDate>
			<description><![CDATA[Has the possibility ever occurred to you that there are thoughts which simply cannot be translated between languages? That language itself is not a blank sheet upon which we express our thoughts and feelings freely, but rather has contours and paths of its own which direct and constrain our thoughts in ways that we are not ordinarily capable of realizing because they have become our very methods of thinking. And that to think in one language is sometimes to think entirely different thoughts than occur in another.
 
This fascinates me. Post your thoughts if it does you as well.
 
A passage from the Tao Te Ching that I think lends itself to this thread:
&#36947;&#21487;&#36947;&#38750;&#24120;&#36947;&#65292;&#21517;&#21487;&#21517;&#38750;&#24120;&#21517;&#12290;
The path that can be followed is not the true path, the name that can be named is not the true name.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>Has the possibility ever occurred to you that there are thoughts which simply cannot be translated between languages? That language itself is not a blank sheet upon which we express our thoughts and feelings freely, but rather has contours and paths of its own which direct and constrain our thoughts in ways that we are not ordinarily capable of realizing because they have become our very methods of thinking. And that to think in one language is sometimes to think entirely different thoughts than occur in another.<br />
 <br />
This fascinates me. Post your thoughts if it does you as well.<br />
 <br />
A passage from the Tao Te Ching that I think lends itself to this thread:<br />
&#36947;&#21487;&#36947;&#38750;&#24120;&#36947;&#65292;&#21517;&#21487;&#21517;&#38750;&#24120;&#21517;&#12290;<br />
The path that can be followed is not the true path, the name that can be named is not the true name.</div>

]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/">Intel</category>
			<dc:creator>Hidden</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/138147-lost-translation.html</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Little Einstein Project</title>
			<link>http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/138026-little-einstein-project.html</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 10:33:26 GMT</pubDate>
			<description>Apparently some doctors and scientist have gotten together and created a 168 dollar project that will teach babies to read from as young as 7 months.  they say that it will make them love reading, and (obviously), increase their brain power. so what do you think, should parents be able to teach these young unknowing, innocent children to read. i say that we should let them enjoy their time as a baby. what do you think ?.</description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>Apparently some doctors and scientist have gotten together and created a 168 dollar project that will teach babies to read from as young as 7 months.  they say that it will make them love reading, and (obviously), increase their brain power. so what do you think, should parents be able to teach these young unknowing, innocent children to read. i say that we should let them enjoy their time as a baby. what do you think ?.</div>

]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/">Intel</category>
			<dc:creator>terra99032</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/138026-little-einstein-project.html</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Tolerance on fictional kiddie pr0nz</title>
			<link>http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/137912-tolerance-fictional-kiddie-pr0nz.html</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 01:59:33 GMT</pubDate>
			<description><![CDATA[Man to be jailed for writing child porn stories | Ottawa and Region | News | Ottawa Sun (http://www.ottawasun.com/news/ottawa/2009/10/29/11570841.html)

Basically, some Canadian got arrested over possession of child porn literature...Not sure about lit, but the US's got a zero tolerance thing for non-real child porn as well:
PROTECT Act of 2003 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003)

---Quote---
Prohibits drawings, sculptures, and pictures of such drawings and sculptures depicting minors in actions or situations that meet the Miller test of being obscene, OR are engaged in sex acts that are deemed to meet the same obscene condition. The law does not explicitly state that images of fictional beings who appear to be under 18 engaged in sexual acts that are not deemed to be obscene are rendered illegal in and of their own condition (illustration of sex of fictional minors).
---End Quote---
Any views on what the tolerance level of possession/distribution should be?

I'd be fine with it, mainly due to this type of porn being victimless and that a book shouldn't be controlling your actions if your old enough to be buying porn in the first place.

(Though Japan could benefit from something like this)

Discuss.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><a href="http://www.ottawasun.com/news/ottawa/2009/10/29/11570841.html" target="_blank">Man to be jailed for writing child porn stories | Ottawa and Region | News | Ottawa Sun</a><br />
<br />
Basically, some Canadian got arrested over possession of child porn literature...Not sure about lit, but the US's got a zero tolerance thing for non-real child porn as well:<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003" target="_blank">PROTECT Act of 2003 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</a><br />
<div style="margin:20px; margin-top:5px; ">
	<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px">Quote:</div>
	<table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%">
	<tr>
		<td class="alt2">
			<hr />
			
				Prohibits drawings, sculptures, and pictures of such drawings and sculptures depicting minors in actions or situations that meet the Miller test of being obscene, OR are engaged in sex acts that are deemed to meet the same obscene condition. The law does not explicitly state that images of fictional beings who appear to be under 18 engaged in sexual acts that are not deemed to be obscene are rendered illegal in and of their own condition (illustration of sex of fictional minors).
			
			<hr />
		</td>
	</tr>
	</table>
</div>Any views on what the tolerance level of possession/distribution should be?<br />
<br />
I'd be fine with it, mainly due to this type of porn being victimless and that a book shouldn't be controlling your actions if your old enough to be buying porn in the first place.<br />
<br />
(Though Japan could benefit from something like this)<br />
<br />
Discuss.</div>

]]></content:encoded>
			<category domain="http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/">Intel</category>
			<dc:creator>Eraser Rain</dc:creator>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://forums.khinsider.com/intel/137912-tolerance-fictional-kiddie-pr0nz.html</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
