Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Unflip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Politics

Unflip

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 22 23

Original poster

When will the BBC be held accountable for their lack of patriotism

559 replies

longfingernails · 01/12/2010 22:59

Why does this far-left propoganda group continually try to do Britain down?

Why can't they have more presenters who think like the majority of Brits - people who believe that Britain is truly great - indeed, the best country in the world.

People who believe in our institutions, who love the monarchy, who revere the military, who speak in hushed awe about the majesty of our traditions. Presenters who are over-awed by the silent beauty of our countryside, and the glory of our heritage and history. Why do they always use their sneering, supercilious, Guardianista attitude - this constant insinuation that Britain should always be taking the blame and apologising. Coincidentally, it seems to stem from the same sort of sneering middle-classery that is prevalent on MN...

The most recent, shameful episode is the Beeb trying their best to spoil the England 2018 bid. Now I have no time at all for football - I can't stand it - but I fully recognise how important it is for our economy, and also for our national psyche.

The sooner the BBC withers and dies the better. Sadly, it has gotten away with a miniscule 16% cut in the TV tax over 6 years. They will continue their ramblings for the foreseeable future.

OP posts:

claig · 06/12/2010 10:26

I do change my views according to evidence. But have you changed your views as a result of the evidence that came out about Climategate?

When you are talking about human nature and good and evil and abstract concepts like truth, beauty, justice, love and patriotism, you are in an abstract realm of philosophical thought, not in the simple world of evidence-based microscopes, telescopes and figures

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 06/12/2010 10:21

No I mean that you don't believe that your opinions should be changed in response to evidence.

claig · 06/12/2010 10:14

'you are a pre-enlightenment thinker'

If you mean I don't agree with the Climategate scientists, then yes I would agree with that. I think some of Plato's pre-enlightenment thinking has never been surpassed and never will be surpassed, because geniuses of abstract thought are rare, whereas Climategate types are two a penny.

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 06/12/2010 10:11

As I said, Claig, you are a pre-enlightenment thinker. There are people who think we were better off in the 14th century than we are now, but I'm not sure you want to make common cause with them.

claig · 06/12/2010 10:10

I'm quite prepared to rest my hat on it.

claig · 06/12/2010 10:09

Plato's theory of forms sounds spot on to me

claig · 06/12/2010 10:05

TCNY, there you go with the old evidence-based materialistic scientific thought. Plato dealt in the abstract, the realm that is closest to the absolute. The infinite, abstract world that is the real language and meaning of the universe, not what can be seen under a microscope. That is the language that approaches the mind of God and the heart of the universe itself. That's why philosophy is the queen of all sciences, because it is through philosophy that we make sense of data and thought. That's why science was a subset of philosophy and why great mathematicians like Descartes and Pascal were above all philosophers.

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 06/12/2010 10:01

Plato isn't studied because he was RIGHT but because he was influential.

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 06/12/2010 10:00

Claig - I suggest the best thing to do is to READ Plato.

Essentially, it's the idea that there is an ideal form of all things (which actually exists in some other 'realm') and that ll things in our world are reflections of it.

Platonic Idealism

You'll like it, it's quality hatstandism.

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 06/12/2010 09:57

Claig - You didn't ask who was smarter, you said that Plato had a larger fraction of the absolute truth and knowledge of the universe.

Plato didn't even know that most of the Universe existed.

claig · 06/12/2010 09:56

TCNY, you know about Plato. Can you explain his theory about forms etc.? I haven't read it, but I am sure it is very interesting.

claig · 06/12/2010 09:54

You think the Climategate evidence-based scientists were smarter than Plato, one of the greatest thinkers in human history? People study Plato's thought the world over. People are trying to forget about Climategate as fast as they can.

claig · 06/12/2010 09:51

yes, that's human nature for you

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 06/12/2010 09:50

Calig - He really wasn't though.

Appletrees · 06/12/2010 09:47

I find it completely bizarre that someone whose argument is that human nature drives us down, has disappeared when human nature is cited as something that drives us up, simply on the grounds that one has cited human nature.

claig · 06/12/2010 09:44

QED

claig · 06/12/2010 09:44

Plato was only human, so he could only aspire to a fraction of the absolute truth and knowledge in the universe. But he was closer to it than the evidence-based researchers at the University of East Anglia.

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 06/12/2010 09:38

Claig - Plato was full of shit though

TheCoalitionNeedsYou · 06/12/2010 09:37

LonFingerNails - See? THIS is why the BBC is great, because a conversation about it turns into one about universal goodness instead.

Appletrees · 06/12/2010 09:33

What a surprise.

Appletrees · 06/12/2010 09:28

Claig: not a vote-winner :)

claig · 06/12/2010 09:25

I believe that justice and truth and beauty are ideals, as Plato said. They are perfect in the absolute, but are unattainable on earth. We only approach a fraction of these ideals in this realm. I think there is a realm above ours, which is the absolute, from which our ideas and ideals ultimately stem from. We are like flowers that blossom according to a predefined external, universal plan. Our human spirit is constantly eveolving in accordance with that absolute plan and it overcomes evil bit by bit and fights the evil on earth carried out often by the powerful such as Mao.

Appletrees · 06/12/2010 09:24

My argument isn't based on Christianity. You can't mock it or engage with it so you are off.

Appletrees · 06/12/2010 09:23

Of course one hopes everyone can benefit. Society is driven by that. It is impossible because we are all different. We cannot indulge a man's desire to have all the money in the world to bane down to his children. Some people are always going to be disappointed. You have moved from nihilism to idealism at the speed of light.

Hullygully · 06/12/2010 09:22

Appletrees - my point is it isn't a debate.

"Feelings" are neither evidence nor valid opinion.

Unflip

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 22 23