Fun Stuff > CHATTER

Machiavellianism

<< < (14/15) > >>

Slick:

--- Quote from: n0t_r0bert_b0yle!! on 14 Aug 2008, 00:10 ---Yeah, I only posted the test as a mildly fun distraction not a completely legitimate test and why did you Godwin the test, there probably are better examples.

--- End quote ---

If you are going to be like that you should really give a better example and not just say you believe one exists.

Tom:
To clarify, my problem is actuallythe example not the Godwin-ing. A better example would be how Hitler and the Nazi party manipulated the German populace into doing and believing what they did.

Nodaisho:
Uh, no, it wouldn't. My example was to show how saying that you disagree with it always being the best policy to tell the truth doesn't mean you are a dishonest manipulative bastard, it means you hold something above honesty, such as the value of life.

And it isn't godwin, who was I comparing with the nazis or hitler?

I used that example because Nazi Germany is a setting everyone knows about, and is also an example of life and death hinging on telling the truth in that example. I suppose I could have used the Underground Railroad, but that example doesn't carry quite as much weight, as it is unlikely the penalty for all involved would be death.

jhocking:

--- Quote from: Whipstitch on 14 Aug 2008, 10:58 ---I think it's worth pointing out again

--- End quote ---

Why? Nobody in this thread is ripping on Machiavelli, so why do you need to repeat your defense?

Chesire Cat:

--- Quote from: n0t_r0bert_b0yle!! on 14 Aug 2008, 15:40 ---To clarify, my problem is actuallythe example not the Godwin-ing. A better example would be how Hitler and the Nazi party manipulated the German populace into doing and believing what they did.

--- End quote ---

Thats why there was 5 options, as appose to an agree/disagree system

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version