Flashback I
2005.03.13 23:09

#On Your Article
I read your article. I just wonder how religion ( in your case Catholics) deeply affects the politics -here US presidential election. We Japanese never ever talk about whether or not it's good or bad morally or legaly right abortion is. Never even I myself thought about it. Of course I object to abortion. But for those who has got a different reasonings, this measure ought to be allowed. Religion has got nothing to with this decision.
Ideologically, I assume, life starts from the conception caused by a zygote, semen and egg forms. But this idea is very ideological. Conception is not the beginning of life. Think... each gamete, semen and egg, has got a lineage from the beginning of life. Life, as an idea, has already started astronomically many years ago. There is no reasonable reason for life to start from a mere conception. No. Definitely not from the moment of conception. Naturally the beginning of life must stem from the appearing of one's body outside womb. Birth of humans are not supposed to be an ideological one but a social one.
The next point.... When you say 'moral' when it comes to 'moral' , that's the problem... I don't even try to think about in sync or out of sync between legal and moral. Generally morally right thing ought to be legal. But remember there are many legal things that are immoral. We'd better not try to confuse these two different categories in the system of our society too positively like someboby. I fairly agree we should make an effort to do in many ways. But when it comes to abortion, its no way...
#I'm Chasing....
I'm chasing your articles and comments very rapidly for these five or six hours but still don't get what standpoint you put yourself. I keep on reading your writings because I found it's interesting and worth reading. So I'm going to contribute some comments on your 'double effect theory' soon ...
Your explanation clearly helps me understand you, yourself and your writings. I want to write further more. But it's 3 a.m. in Japan now. Time to leave from the screen. See you tomorrow.
Yeah...you are right..Life is a biological concept. Everyone has to have a very precious ...bestowed life...it's definitely irreplacable. Of course everybody knows life starts from the moment of conception and of course many people know that law does not allow unborn baby to hold personhood...I know life is a biological concept, but at the same time life should not be regarded as it is. In this respect, life should be regarded as social rather than biological concept I may say... I assume you put too much emphasis on life of individual body. Everybody in a civilised society knows individual unit or body is first and foremost important, should be protected by law at any time. But from time to time it is something that has to be sacrificed in the name of public interest. If one's life were useful for helping others life more than one, one is worth being sacrificed. Kamikaze turned out to be a worthless act. But at that time, young people believed it's beneficial for saving Japan, Japanese people, Emperor, even their family. So they did. If someone's life is useful to save tens of thousands of lives, it's worth sacrificing it. Death does not mean anything in itself. Death of serial killer brings about general applause among ordinary citizens. Death of very good doctor who saved tens of thousands of patients brings about thousands of sad cries around the world. Death of unborn baby causes sadness in its parents. But they can keep it in their minds till the end of time. Death of very old people causes sadness among those who know well. But still they can give it up as a matter of natural consequence. As death means always in many ways, a value of life is not equal and should not be equal, either. and in a natural consequence of this argument, there is a difference in weight of life. So if you believe kinds of communal society is an ideal, it's a ricecake drawn in a paper( which means something impossible to exist) thus I conclude it's the right form of society for us to be exposed by a very sever struggle of life and death. And I believe this real world we live materialise this idea. So I want to accept it rather possitively. I'm going to write about relationship between civilisation and war later...
I intended to have been writing further more, but I was unable to... Following is a comment made at the almost same time as I wrote above comment. .... You sometimes go too far to say something that has not been proven to be true in light of histrically correct thing. E.g. If you insisted crusaders are formed or planned to fight against invasions done by Muslims, it would be too far to assert so. And it's not going to be a good excuse to start that mission. United States of America government used to use this stereotype of saying as a cause for their starting any wars. And also it was true of Japanese military regeme some fifty years ago. ( Because you attacked first, we have solemn right to counter attack you in order to defend our country, our citizens even in case of outside our territory, etc... ) Remember Bush Doctrine a few years ago. We don't have to remember Pearl Harbour in order to start war. The docrine Bush made enables your country to act pre-emptively. That's a good idea and still effective. No reason is necessary for those who want to start war. Such a very strong nation as the United States of America, this idea is nothing but convenient. You can start war when you want to, and the United States of America cannot be defeated of one in thousand times.
Back to the point. It's not only useful but even harmful for you to state something wrongfully. In this world these days, anyone can do whatever simply because they want to. And at least I should say that that one has to have enough power to endorse their actions. ( to be continued)
We've got huge chasm in recognition of history. Partly I should say it's derived from our circumstances we raised up. And partly it's from our background we obtained. I had better write about my recognition of history in general. I am really not sure whether it is only particular to me, or generally thought to be acceptable in Japan. - There are three revolutionary changes on thoughts in human history. One is Bhudda , and the second one is Moses , the last one is Nietzsche( or Marx , if you would like to replace it.) More than 3500 years ago, we used to have a polytheistic point of view throughout our world. As many Gods as things exist. It's from a very primitive form of animism to a developed form of polytheism in a certain degree used to be seen in many parts of the Oriental civilisations, in Mesopotamia and in Egypt. And the one reaching point for its polytheistic view was Buddhism. In Buddhism, any living thing which holds life connects directly to God. At least it was a development from an animistic point of view. Secondly and most importantly, Moses founded Judaism which has got a monotheistic viewpoint. And foundation of monotheism was the most splendid event human beings ever achieved. Because by this, people were forced to feel reverent, feared to God, a personalised figure which was called in proper noun. The third one was an advent of secular world. When Nietzsche proclaimed 'Gott ist tot', which means advent of age human beings decide how they want to live. Some people liked to call this age the age of existentialism, while the others didn't want to call it. Whatever the name of age we now live, more and more we live in a secular society. Here I just wanted to state my personal standpoint toward history. Now I leave it to your judgement . ....The United Nations is one of the most intricate form the United States of America ever has. .... There would be no reason to be found for China to invade Taiwan. And also, remember it's difficult to invade island country ....
#Gases Left in China
Japan's military regime in the second World War left tens of thousands of ammunitions- mainly poisonous gases- in China. We are still funding millions of money for finding and removing these gases in corporation with China. However, surprisingly enough, they made the same mistakes in our homeland. They left the same kinds of gases in many parts of Japan. Even today people who live nearby have been badly affected by the continuous emission of these. The lesson for us is that the government which doesn't show respect to the nationals of other countries has tendency to undermine the nationals of its own country, in case of Japan. So we realised we have to respect any nationals as well as us. But definitely it's not likely to happen in your country. Don't worry too much!
Of course there are possibilities for everything. - But I don't think it's not likely to happen in your country, at least so far. I can explain to you why. You see in my country, owing to a very rapid economic growth which had been done especially in the '60s and the '70s after the World War the second, countless environmental problems had been occurred. It was not actually a mere problem but diseases caused by an industrial waste such as cadmium, mercury, polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB), dioxin, and photochemical smog. The suffering of these victims seems to have been passing and being forgotten from the daily business, have been about to fade out from our memories. But remember once it broke out, nothing but only the passing of time can be cure, and which costs tens of millions of our money to compensate for, which would surely damage our economy in the long run. This is not a matter of whether you are Neo-conservative or Liberal...at least I think so. I mean.. regardless whether the master of the White House is, your government is not silly. From the outsider's point of view, at least I impress so.
#So far as I know...
Let's stop talking about a kind of debate which characterised "we cannot help but choose the lesser of the two unfavourable." Because we will have a President either from Republicans or from Democrats. So I try thinking about the only two possible cases.- Bush wins or Kerry wins... If Bush won the election, he would continue his foreign policy as he has been doing in the Middle East, and in the East Asia. Our current administration ( Japan ) are always in favour of Bush's policy. So Bush is not going to ask any more than support and money. -Fortunately it's not hard for us to accept. He has not been asking too much from our budget and he will not. I am largely thankful for his treatment on us. Always he takes sides with us Japanese in a world political scene. If Kerry won the race, first of all he would withdraw U.S. troops staying in Iraq and Afghanistan. ( This is merely my guess.) And he will try to see especially economic problems lying inwardly in the U.S. He will try to save incomes of every average households by imposing an extra customs for restricting or prohibiting various end products coming from overseas including Japan. Japan is such a tiny country. Basically we have scarce resourses to make any end product which will change into money not in Japan but in the U.S. So I assume Japan is one of the countries that has got largest benefit from this economic system- Free Trade System within a framwork of world Capitalism. We Japanese are not really afraid of simply because Bush invaded Afganistan and Iraq but we are simly afraid of the advent of " the storm of the Protectionist's policy. " Seeing that the current situation we now face in this world, it might have sounded even it's irresponsible or irrevant, but it is true of the every Japanese who has rational view. If Bush won, please continue his policy on Japan. If Kerry won the election, please do not change economic policy and do not try to introduce Protectionist's policy... Again bear it firmly in your mind that Japan is basically a poor country and because of the Protectionist's policy the U.S. and other nations some 60 years ago took Japan had no choice but start a miserable war which eventually led to a total devastation of our land...
On troops...Suppose Kerry won the election, if he is more hawkish than Bush, he might demand more Japanese troops. Even though they are staying in Iraq for peaceful purposes, it would be harder for outside countries to see so. Japan is going to face a difficult choice.
On Protectionist's measure Kerry might take... it's hard for us to assume Japan is going to be the only exception to this rule. Japan's economy has been sluggishing rapidly while other Asian nations have been accelerating their economic growth. Even in terms of any notion related to cost of labour, the differences have been narrowering.( Look at the examples of Taiwan, Korea, and the coastal area of China.) There is no firm reason for Kerry to regard us an exception.
As regards tax loophole... Since we can find so many universary widespread U.S. corporations, it would be also hard for him to differ corporations between domestic and overseas only from their locations. I mean even if he might attempt to do so boldly, it would be very much likely to fail. Therefore I cannot believe such a wishful thinking you posed.
And the last point... These sad periods were only very limited... just fifty years or so which end by the defeat of Japan in the World War the second. In a very long span of our history with neighbouring countries, we admire China and Korea as a predecessor of advanced civilisations.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Flashback I Preferences Top 2 comments Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold: -1: 2 comments 0: 2 comments 1: 2 comments 2: 1 comments 3: 0 comments 4: 0 comments 5: 0 comments Flat Nested No Comments Threaded Oldest First Newest First Highest Scores First Oldest First (Ignore Threads) Newest First (Ignore Threads) Save:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Wow- old stuff(Score:2)
by Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) * <seebert@seeberfamily.org> on 2005.03.15 6:11 (#11936615) (http://www.informationr.us/ Last Journal: 2005.09.24 5:50)
I'd catch up if I could, but I'm very busy this week...to me, morality is the information stream of the individual. To make decisions without referencing one's moral code of ethics runs the risk of hipocricy at best, and harming oneself and others at worst. It's lying to yourself- not being true to what you feel and believe.--Instead of teaching our children the wrong example of genocide, go down in dignity and teach that we are stupid.
Re:Wow- old stuff(Score:1)
by mercedo (822671) on 2005.03.16 1:15 (#11943741) (http://slashdot.org/~mercedo/journal/109855 Last Journal: 2005.09.24 14:16)
I think that it's karma which causes us to act whether according to act as we think it's along with our moral code or inevitably we can't help but act not along with our moral code. Here we are facing a conflict between what it should be and what it is. We ought to overcome chasms lying ahead of our times.--Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters