Quote:
Originally Posted by KSig RC
I'm not trying to be rude, I'm just surprised by how you're advancing your argument here.
In fact - restate it for me. Because earlier, you claimed that people are "too self-absorbed" to think that smart white blond girls have more value than other people ... then you moved the goalposts, and said that "value" does not equal "value" in any sense of valuation I provided (and I provided multiple types of valuation). Now "value" means "better person" . . . which seems like an essentially meaningless term, at least for our purposes, because it's impossible to define.
So . . . is it some sort of intrinsic value in people? How can you say it's a different sort of "value" than the commonly-accepted definition of "value" as something that can be counted or expressed in comparison with other things?
Apparently, you can't measure "better person" because it's something different than the actual, value-driven differentiations that I provided.
How did we get here? That's not rhetorical - look back at your posts in this thread. It's kind of bizarre - you're attempting to separate yourself from your own arguments. It's sort of duplicitous (in the literal sense of the term) - you're both arguing that your "inside knowledge" of the situation makes it unique, and that the knowledge is globally or universally applicable. Can it really be both?
I'm so confused. What are you really trying to do here?
|
First, there is no argument. There are only my posts on how I see things. Opinion. Second, I "claimed" nothing. I did say that I think people do not deep down believe that someone like Natalee is a more worthy person than someone who was more average at that age, since most people are in fact "average", and they would essentially be believing people like Natalee are better than THEY are. And yes, I think most people are too self absorbed to really believe that.
I also do not think that measuring a person's worth based on fame and money even works in relation to this case, as we're talking about an 18 year old girl. I think her story is more "interesting" to the public and therefore more sellable for several reasons, including the fact that she was pretty, blond, smart, white, and disappeared in a tropical location under suspicious circumstances.
It's not that complicated, nor is it an argument, and as I've said, this is not something I can or do look at objectively. I absolutely do not claim that my "inside knowledge" makes my viewpoint unique. I do not have "inside knowledge", I simply knew Natalee and her friends. This only matters in relation to this thread because it means I am not an objective observer, and is certainly not "unique".
I'm not trying to do anything. You are making this 547389574839578349 more complicated than it actually is, because what this boils down to is my posting my opinions. I am not trying to make an argument, look at this objectively, make an informed point, or find some sort of great truth. I am simply saying that I do not believe almost everyone genuinely thinks at their core that it is less of a loss of life when the missing person isn't blond, pretty, or smart. That's all there is to it.
Threaded Mode