We don’t live in an ideal world’ said Mr. Nabeel Al Arabi commenting on the popular dissatisfaction on the performance of the Arab League towards the disastrous situation in some Syrian cities and the daily killings and torture in Syria.
What is the world we live in then so that we know how to better deal with it? Because ‘ideally’ speaking, if some criminal keeps committing same horrible crime over and over again, there should be some means to stop him and get him to trial.
May be to answer that question, it helps to know that world philosophies can be classified into: idealism, realism, and pragmatism.
Idealism assumes that true reality is derived only by ideas. On the other hand, realism accepts an argument as true only if it belongs to the world of physical objects. In this approach, truth should be objective and tangible. Pragmatism deems things as real if they can be experimentally observed. This approach assumes that reality is dynamic not static, i.e. it can change.
So what is the ‘big’ players’ take on this? May be, we can say that:
Assad is apparently living in the world of ideas. This is can be very much observed especially from his last speech yesterday, when he kept talking about Arabism, nation, conspiracy, etc., at the same time a four-month old infant body was submitted to her uncle by security forces with torture marks, and with thousands of horrible YouTube videos of killings and tortures (yes sir, we do live in the YouTube era!). But if the world of ideas contradicts boldly with the physical realistic world by bringing evil thing to it like killing, what else can we name it other than fantasia, hallucination, or simply lies and truth-manipulation?
Other big players take pragmatic approach into dealing with the Syrian crisis. Some of them, like Russia and Iran for example, want to enforce pragmatism into the nature of the crisis, by trying to convince the world that there is no static truth in it and the truth is rather, changing. Well, it may be the case that the only changing thing is their own interests. Others prefer to apply pragmatism to the way they actually approach resolving the crisis, like the Arab League for example. In this category, key players tend to take an experimental approach, observing the results, and act accordingly. Example: visit Assad, listen to his explanations and promises, provide compliments, give it some time, observe the results, and act accordingly. Another recent example is the AL observers. It is all about acting upon experimentation with the real world settings and result observation.
While this seem the only viable approach in case of multiple powers with contradicting interests (or ideologies), it remains a painful truth (and shame on humanity) that the bill Syrians are paying amid these ‘experimentations’ and ‘fantasias’ is edited in their own blood and souls. This remains the one realistic truth, and it is a very painful one!
This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 11th, 2012 at 8:47 am and is filed under free2comment. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Syria and the non-idealistic world
We don’t live in an ideal world’ said Mr. Nabeel Al Arabi commenting on the popular dissatisfaction on the performance of the Arab League towards the disastrous situation in some Syrian cities and the daily killings and torture in Syria.
What is the world we live in then so that we know how to better deal with it? Because ‘ideally’ speaking, if some criminal keeps committing same horrible crime over and over again, there should be some means to stop him and get him to trial.
May be to answer that question, it helps to know that world philosophies can be classified into: idealism, realism, and pragmatism.
Idealism assumes that true reality is derived only by ideas. On the other hand, realism accepts an argument as true only if it belongs to the world of physical objects. In this approach, truth should be objective and tangible. Pragmatism deems things as real if they can be experimentally observed. This approach assumes that reality is dynamic not static, i.e. it can change.
So what is the ‘big’ players’ take on this? May be, we can say that:
Assad is apparently living in the world of ideas. This is can be very much observed especially from his last speech yesterday, when he kept talking about Arabism, nation, conspiracy, etc., at the same time a four-month old infant body was submitted to her uncle by security forces with torture marks, and with thousands of horrible YouTube videos of killings and tortures (yes sir, we do live in the YouTube era!). But if the world of ideas contradicts boldly with the physical realistic world by bringing evil thing to it like killing, what else can we name it other than fantasia, hallucination, or simply lies and truth-manipulation?
Other big players take pragmatic approach into dealing with the Syrian crisis. Some of them, like Russia and Iran for example, want to enforce pragmatism into the nature of the crisis, by trying to convince the world that there is no static truth in it and the truth is rather, changing. Well, it may be the case that the only changing thing is their own interests. Others prefer to apply pragmatism to the way they actually approach resolving the crisis, like the Arab League for example. In this category, key players tend to take an experimental approach, observing the results, and act accordingly. Example: visit Assad, listen to his explanations and promises, provide compliments, give it some time, observe the results, and act accordingly. Another recent example is the AL observers. It is all about acting upon experimentation with the real world settings and result observation.
While this seem the only viable approach in case of multiple powers with contradicting interests (or ideologies), it remains a painful truth (and shame on humanity) that the bill Syrians are paying amid these ‘experimentations’ and ‘fantasias’ is edited in their own blood and souls. This remains the one realistic truth, and it is a very painful one!
Share this:
Like this:
This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 11th, 2012 at 8:47 am and is filed under free2comment. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.