View Single Post
  #334  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2009, 11:44 PM
geoff's two cents geoff's two cents is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCPhil View Post
I wasn't name calling. Snob is an valid term in the study of philosophy and political science.



If a person feels that a method of living, like living in the suburbs and commuting, is inferior to high density living and walking to work (mainly because that person does it themselves, or aspires to do it), and as a result they are condescending towards others, that person is a snob. It's not an insult; it's a label.

I don't think your lifestyle is wrong or improper or invalid. I don't think condo living is evil or stupid. I don't think people who own condos downtown are lower on the pecking order than those with property and I don't think people without cars should be crushed under my jackboot. It's just not my choice right now to live downtown, for both personal, situational and financial causes.

However you seem to think that owning property and driving is harmful, and think lower of me, and others that drive, because of it. And you seem to think people who do make that choice should be punished for not being as "sustainable" as yourself. You wish to make life harder for those who do not share your values and worldview.

See, I'm arguing that the viaducts provide choice and convenience for people. I'm arguing that the majority's choice gets precedence. You are arguing that your personal belief that the automobile is harmful is superior to my belief. That's a snob.

Other people, like junius, bring up relevant facts and opinions. junius believes the viaducts aren't heavily used and removing them won't have a big impact. He's not debating my philosophy with his statement, or debating people don't have free will with his statement.

He stated his point. I might not agree with it, but we are both on the same level: he thinks no big deal, I do. That is the actual debate. Are they useful? Not: do they contribute to the supposed ills of society you believe in.

See, You think it might have a huge impact removing them, and that that is good, because you don't agree with the lives the people using the viaduct have, so good riddance to them. You want to force people to do something different to reaffirm your belief that the environment is paramount compared to the life styles of people.
BCPhil, please stop this. I like to think you and I have better things to do than banter back and forth, on and on. It's pointless: this is not the right forum for that discussion. Moreover, I'd suggest that any attempt to engage two people with such mutually incompatible views is doomed to failure. It's like watching CNN Crossfire - or Jerry Springer. . . That's not the type of company I'd like to be associated with.
Reply With Quote