Christopher Hitchens used to say that he was delighted to hear his opponents lob ad hominems at him because it signaled to the world that they had lost the argument.
I don't agree with everything Hitchens said - but man oh man was he an excellent interlocutor and debater!! Everyone should study his style and skill as a modern Cicero in oration.
Notwithstanding his razor wit, his way with a phrase and his bold, brilliant oratory, he was nonetheless bound within the constraints of his own ratiocinatory abilities, identifing the material world as the sum total of human existence which human reason -- and reason alone -- could master and bring to heel, like a god might.
“As for the question of bribery or no bribery, of course you are agreed that it is a scandalous and abominable offence to accept money for acts injurious to the commonwealth ... the man who takes them and is thereby corrupted can no longer be trusted by the state as a judge of sound policy” (Demosthenes, On the False Embassy).
Could this be written of the situation across the Globe today?
It's crazy when you realise just how modern so many of the ancient issues were (or I should more accurately say, how ancient so many of our modern issues are!)
The only problem I see is when the person's character IS THE ISSUE. As Aristotle might say, "unvirtuous" people often make unvirtuous policies, and it comes back full circle to their character or lack thereof. I believe ethically based attacks can sometimes do exactly what they need to-- point out why a particular person should not have a particular position (of power or leadership). That has happened at my college and is happening in our country's political system right now. E.g......an autocratic person does what he/she needs to in order to remain the autocrat in charge no matter what. Again, it happened at my workplace exactly as at the national level. We teachers had to "attack" the man's character to get him out of the position he was using to drive our organization to its death. Thx.
Hey Anya, just finished ur fascinating article on cancel culture and character assassination. Thanks for sharing your insights and knowledge. After some research, I believe this translation might be easier to understand:
"I never cease to urge peace; which, even if unjust, is more beneficial than the most just war with one's fellow citizens."
Genesis 3:1-5, Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the Lord God had made.
He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You [Hebrew plural] shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’” But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
In the Orthodox Jewish Bible, "the serpent" is rendered as a proper noun "Nachash." Every other entry where Nachash appears the term applies to satan.
The last Biblical reference to "Nachash" is Revelation 20:2, And he seized the Dragon, the NACHASH HaKadmoni, who is Malshin [samekh mem, the devil] and Hasatan. And he bound him for elef shanim (one thousand years),....
Nachash aka Hasatan gets one more billing: Revelation 20:10, And Hasatan, the one deceiving them, was cast into the Agam HaEish (fire) and gofrit (sulfur), where both the Chayyah [Anti-Moshiach] and the Navi Sheker (False Prophet) were, and they will be tormented yomam v’lailah l’Olemei Olamim (day and night forever and ever).
The End of Character Assassination -- forever and ever.
Christopher Hitchens used to say that he was delighted to hear his opponents lob ad hominems at him because it signaled to the world that they had lost the argument.
I don't agree with everything Hitchens said - but man oh man was he an excellent interlocutor and debater!! Everyone should study his style and skill as a modern Cicero in oration.
Notwithstanding his razor wit, his way with a phrase and his bold, brilliant oratory, he was nonetheless bound within the constraints of his own ratiocinatory abilities, identifing the material world as the sum total of human existence which human reason -- and reason alone -- could master and bring to heel, like a god might.
Well said!
Thank you!
“As for the question of bribery or no bribery, of course you are agreed that it is a scandalous and abominable offence to accept money for acts injurious to the commonwealth ... the man who takes them and is thereby corrupted can no longer be trusted by the state as a judge of sound policy” (Demosthenes, On the False Embassy).
Could this be written of the situation across the Globe today?
Me thinks so.
It's crazy when you realise just how modern so many of the ancient issues were (or I should more accurately say, how ancient so many of our modern issues are!)
Well put! We can learn so much from the ancient’s wise ones. But their world, little as it was, was as crazy as ours.
The only problem I see is when the person's character IS THE ISSUE. As Aristotle might say, "unvirtuous" people often make unvirtuous policies, and it comes back full circle to their character or lack thereof. I believe ethically based attacks can sometimes do exactly what they need to-- point out why a particular person should not have a particular position (of power or leadership). That has happened at my college and is happening in our country's political system right now. E.g......an autocratic person does what he/she needs to in order to remain the autocrat in charge no matter what. Again, it happened at my workplace exactly as at the national level. We teachers had to "attack" the man's character to get him out of the position he was using to drive our organization to its death. Thx.
Hey Anya, just finished ur fascinating article on cancel culture and character assassination. Thanks for sharing your insights and knowledge. After some research, I believe this translation might be easier to understand:
"I never cease to urge peace; which, even if unjust, is more beneficial than the most just war with one's fellow citizens."
Thank you! And yes, that translation is a great addition to the conversation - very illuminating
The Origin of Character Assassination:
Genesis 3:1-5, Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the Lord God had made.
He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You [Hebrew plural] shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’” But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
In the Orthodox Jewish Bible, "the serpent" is rendered as a proper noun "Nachash." Every other entry where Nachash appears the term applies to satan.
The last Biblical reference to "Nachash" is Revelation 20:2, And he seized the Dragon, the NACHASH HaKadmoni, who is Malshin [samekh mem, the devil] and Hasatan. And he bound him for elef shanim (one thousand years),....
Nachash aka Hasatan gets one more billing: Revelation 20:10, And Hasatan, the one deceiving them, was cast into the Agam HaEish (fire) and gofrit (sulfur), where both the Chayyah [Anti-Moshiach] and the Navi Sheker (False Prophet) were, and they will be tormented yomam v’lailah l’Olemei Olamim (day and night forever and ever).
The End of Character Assassination -- forever and ever.