FEATURE ARTICLES. HOW CAN WE FIGHT TERRORISM? PT 4.

ANOTHER CATEGORY OF POTENTIAL TERRORIST RECRUITS.

THE POWERLESS PAWN.

Perhaps you are an Individual, who through Indoctrination and Constant Reinforcement, believes that a "HOLY WAR" to Destroy the Enemies of God is an Absolute Necessity.  ( This can be used by any Faith, Religion, or Belief System, for it is a Generic Judgment that allows you to plug in the Deity of your choice.) Perhaps by Living in a Isolated Community, where there is no chance to Interact with others who might look at the World Differently, your frustration at not being able to "Make a Difference" becomes a constant thought in your mind.

Along with this, you also happen to Occupy One of the Lowest Rungs on the Social Ladder in the Culture you Inhabit. YOUR GENDER, ANCESTRY, FINANCIAL STATUS, OR EVEN DISABILITY PREVENTS YOU FROM HAVING ANY SAY, INFLUENCE, OR IMPACT ON YOUR LIFE, THE LIVES OF THOSE AROUND YOU, AND THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE.

However, One Day a Person of Power and Prestige approaches you with an Interesting Offer. Contrary to what you think, or have been told by others, you have the Capability to do Great and Wonderful Things. In Fact, GOD NEEDS YOUR HELP TO CARRY OUT HIS HOLY WORD ON EARTH.

You are Naturally Flattered with this Attention by someone of such Importance, and the IDEA THAT GOD NEEDS YOUR HELP IS A DREAM COME TRUE. YOU ARE NO LONGER A NOBODY TO BE IGNORED AND PUSHED TO THE SIDE, BUT A PERSON TO BE ADMIRED AND LOOKED UPON WITH GREAT RESPECT.

Of Course there is a catch...

LOGIC. WHAT ARE DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS? PART 4.

ARGUMENT #1.                                                 ARGUMENT #2.

PREMISE 1.                                                      PREMISE 1.

ANYONE WHO BELIEVES IN HUMAN                ALL CHRISTIANS ARE 

EVOLUTION IS AN ATHEIST.                             ANTI-SCIENCE.    

PREMISE 2.                                                      PREMISE 2.      

ALL ATHEISTS DO NOT BELIEVE                     IF YOU ARE ANTI- SCIENCE, 

IN GOD.                                                            YOU DO NOT FOLLOW THE 

                                                                        SCIENTIFIC METHOD.             

                                                  

CONCLUSION.                                                CONCLUSION. 

THEREFORE, IF YOU BELIEVE IN                  THEREFORE, IF YOU ARE A

HUMAN EVOLUTION, YOU DO NOT                CHRISTIAN, YOU DO NOT

BELIEVE IN GOD.                                           FOLLOW THE SCIENTIFIC

                                                                      METHOD.

                                     (REPRINTED FROM PART 2.)

IN #1, THOSE CONSIDERED ANTI-RELIGION OR ANTI- GOD ARE SUBJECT TO FALLACIOUS REASONING BY INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS WHO DEFINE "RELIGION" AND "GOD" SO NARROWLY, THAT ANYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH THEIR STRICT AND SPECIFIC DEFINITION OF SCRIPTURE ARE ATHEISTS. YET, WE FIND THAT MANY INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE EMPLOYED IN SCIENTIFIC FIELDS ARE CONFIRMED THEISTS, BUT DO NOT MIX THEIR RELIGIOUS FAITH WITH ESTABLISHED SCIENTIFIC PRINCIPLES.

In Argument #2, we find a Conclusion that, Essentially, Attacks a Section of Humanity that Adheres to More Traditional Religious Beliefs than those in the First Argument. However, like in the first example, we find those who try to use a VALID DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT TO JUSTIFY CONCLUSIONS THAT DO NOT STAND UP TO SCRUTINY, AND ARE ULTIMATELY REVEALED TO BE UNTRUTHFUL.

An Analysis of the Second Argument begins with the Premise:

"ALL CHRISTIANS ARE ANTI-SCIENCE."

THIS IS AN ASSERTION THAT MUST BE DEFENDED, AND CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO STAND WITHOUT PROPER DEFINITIONS OF "CHRISTIAN" AND "SCIENCE" BEING PUT FORTH TO JUSTIFY THE WORDING IN THE FIRST PREMISE.

IF WE TAKE THE FOLLOWING EXAMPLE:

"TO BE A CHRISTIAN, ONE MUST ACCEPT THE DIVINE NATURE OF JESUS OF NAZARETH AS BEING THE SON OF GOD."

AS A PROPER DEFINITION FOR BEING A CHRISTIAN, WE MUST ASK THE FOLLOWING:

WHY DOES SUCH A DEFINITION AUTOMATICALLY PLACE THOSE WHO ACCEPT IT AS TRUE, INTO AN ADDITIONAL CATEGORY OF BEING "ANTI-SCIENCE?"

THE ANSWER USUALLY REVOLVES AROUND THE FOLLOWING LINE OF REASONING...

LOOK FOR PT 5.

ETHICS AND MORALITY. THERE IS BEAUTY IN...

There is Beauty in ...

...a childs laugh. An expression of joy from the innocent.

...giving of yourself with no qualifications.

...believing that love is created not manufactured.

...accepting others for who they are, not what they are.

There is Beauty in...

...admitting when your wrong.

...not gloating when you are right.

...remembering we are a product of those who came before.

...what could have been. Sometimes we fail to see what is before us, and the result is unfortunate.

There is Beauty in...

...the decision to do what is right, regardless

of the outcome.

...Humanity, when we don't treat each other

as a means to a goal.

...not allowing another to dictate morality,

when you disagree.

...accepting that your faith is wonderful, but no

more valid then someone elses.

There is Beauty in...

...Trust, Accountability, Fairness and Equality. Because,

when these are gone, what is left?

Nothing, and there is no Beauty in that.

FEATURE ARTICLES. THE SOCIOPATH- HOW DOES THE "FAILED SOCIOPATH"... FAIL?

So what makes the FAILED SOCIOPATH, easier to spot and identify than the ACCOMPLISHED SOCIOPATH and the FUNCTIONAL SOCIOPATH?

In practical terms, in can be summed up with the following Personality Traits that are usually manifested by their actions;

They are often very IMPULSIVE- It is the lack of Mental Discipline and Self- Control, that under certain circumstances, completely breaks down. A complete inability to control their Base Desires, if a certain scenario is played out before them.

Besides acting on Impulse, often to the immediate detriment of their chosen lifestyle, they seem incapable of looking beyond immediate gratification, if a certain situation presents itself. It is often related to the phrase, "They must have snapped." 

However, this drastic change of behavior is sometimes just a reaction to a situation that brought out the True Nature of the Failed Sociopath. This can happen Once, Twice, Several or Many times.

While the Failed Sociopath may react on Pure Impulse, this is often triggered by a perception that the "Time is Right" or "Nows my Chance." It is often the faulty assumption that their immediate actions, have little chance of discovery, or will result in no Negative Personal Consequences.

What makes the Failed Sociopath different from the first two Categories, is the inability to judge the Reality of a given Situation. They are Reckless,Thoughtless and given to taking risks for Immediate Gratification, that the Successful Sociopath would never even consider. To a lesser extent, this is also true of the Functional Sociopath.

While it is true that the Failed Sociopath can get away with certain actions that may never be found out, it is Cunning that they rely on, not objectivity. This means that luck is sometimes the key to getting away with certain Crimes.

SEE PT 16.