September 2017

S M T W T F S
     12
34 56789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Sunday, February 18th, 2007 05:26 am
The argument is based on the (count and, to a lesser extent, intensity of) conflicts in the Middle East not involving Israel.

I feel this is a weak argument. Obvsiouly Israel is not just another country in the region, so ideological (including religious) issues cannot be overlooked. Has anyone seen a stronger argument?
Sunday, February 18th, 2007 02:25 pm (UTC)
It's interesting to see what kind of argument we are trying to develop.

One thing is if we discuss the current events: there is little disagreement between our position, so the discussion would end after each party has said what it thinks.

Another thing is if we want to see a scientific argumentation, which needs to take into account more factors, however insignificant they may seem to us (but I cannot do it, not being an expert).

Yet another thing is if we want to convince sceptics or curious but clueless people.

I guess, since the first option is not very interesting and the second one is not attainable, I am more interested in the third option. But did I miss something?
Sunday, February 18th, 2007 02:34 pm (UTC)
The second option is, of course, the most interesting. It is, I believe, insoluble in an abstract argument. The only solution would be to let them get rid of Israel and see. In my view the real frenzy will start then. But I am not tempted to see myself proven right.
Monday, February 19th, 2007 02:13 pm (UTC)
Well, indeed! No control case, please. :-)