h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I'm nervous. Remember I'm a nugget on this site, greener than the Vale of Evesham or even the craggy glens of The Highlands.
How could you propose such an innocent in that uncharacteristic non-liberal way?

Dive in roll about in the mud or stay green...

We all jumped in at some point...
Come on the mud's lovely, warm and squelchy... don't worry about spalshing


Math

above all (which is why it's written at the bottom )

I propose that the BBC should be sold to the highest bidder.

In support of the above I refer all participants to the recent public enquiries and the comments and conclusions therein published.

Good debating point OETZI. However if you posted it as a new thread it would get more attention. Find the 'New Conversation' button and make a new'un

Ste

Ste, how lovely to see you. I'd suggest a beer, but I'm not at work currently. Whatcha doing for lunch Monday? email me on my uci account (I'm assuming you either have or will have one soon!)...

Ste I haven't got a clue how to do that.
If it happens then I usually give myself a start.

Just click on the ODS banner at the top of this page, then find the discuss this entry button at the bottom of that page, and bob's your uncle.

Noggin

Thanks Nog
Trial and Error

The difference between murder and manslaughter (UK law terms) is apparent to the killer, but not to the victim. Is there a worthwhile discussion lurking here, d'you think?

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Could be, could be. If I were only clearer on your meaning!

In the UK, murder is deliberate and/or pre-meditated; manslaughter was not intended or planned in advance. So the difference between these two can be important to the killer, particularly in court! To the victim, however, there is no difference: dead is dead. More philosophically, hurt is unaffected by whether or not it was intended. So, is there a debate here?

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Hmm. Given that I've seen the philosophical resumes of most the members here, I'm not sure there'd be enough conflict! But there should be.
Everyone knows that in France they sometimes let people off for "crimes de passion". I myself get very angry when I get angry; I can easily see how a big argument could get violent. Living as I do in the world of youth, where people push you around just for lookin' at them funny, I see how easily things get blown up. Is murder (in either sense) just an extension of violence? Or is it a completely different act requiring an immensely less ordinary frame of mind? If you knew that society wouldn't punish you for killing someone, would you do it? My answer is no, whereas I would occasionally get violent if I knew I wouldn't get punished (step parents a good example... grr, b*stards) which lends itself to the impression that killing requires a completely different frame of mind above and beyond that of "passion".

In a 'crime of passion', there really isn't anywhere between discussion, dispute and murder where you can draw a line. The whole thing is a continuous spectrum. Although no such killing is planned, if the dispute goes far enough.... So my view is that premeditated murder could well be a qualitatively different act, but a passion killing probably isn't.

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

Hmm. I think I agree, actually. Which stops all debate here, unless someone else pops up...

Hi all

Blackberry Cat here

Political leanings: Socialist
Religious leanings: Agnostic
Philosophical leanings: Rationalist

Welcome, Blackberry! A debater after my own heart.

Thanks for the welcome

Mind you since posting that I've been doing a bit more reading and got myself thoroughly confused as to whether I'm a logical positivist or a rationalist . Probably should've left that bit blank .

Political: Socialist who wants the Lib dems to win (i feel sorry for them)

Religious: Evangelical Anglican

philosophical: Scientific (plus i too Like orwell)

I would like to apply.

Political: Quantum communist (or q-bit capitalist if you prefer)
Religious: Difficult to say; I reasoned a mathamatic probability for the existence of God.
philosophical: IDIC - All viewpoints are equal and valid (although I prefer logical viewpoints).

Welcome, both of you. Frame0, I think that the libdems deserve to win, but frankly it's not going to happen. I mean, never has. Why should it now?
Atlantic_Cable - Another Neurological-Model Agnostic! I'd invite you to some kind of club or something, but I'm not certain it exists.