Royal Prank Call Nurse Found Dead

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Arguing for arguments sake and nothing else...

I think your post was directed a Helix and not me, having read it.

[HeliX]

Because on the off chance that they're only doing it because they think absolutely no-one in the world cares whether they do or not, perhaps I can show them otherwise.

Ok, so you do care about what they do or not. Why? I ask this because it looks like you on contradictory grounds when it comes to this view you have of judgement.

 

Of course I care. I care that the nurse killed herself too, and I find it deeply sad. However I don't believe that relates to her having "poor thinking". Caring whether someone lives or dies is not the same as saying the thinking that led them to kill themselves was poor. Their decision is theirs to make, whether I, or anyone else, cares about the outcome or not.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Can you answer a question directly?

[quilp]

Arguing for arguments sake and nothing else...

I think your post was directed a Helix and not me having read it.

 

Helix is not the one obsessed with minutae here.

[HeliX]

Can you answer a question directly?

 

You asked if I care or not and I said "Of course I care." Is it possible to be more direct than that?

[La_Dolce_Vita]

It's not minutiae. It is about being clear about what is being said. I have been clear. Whereas Helix is throwing a whole lot of things out there of which much I have not said.

And in your last post you mention about altruism and human nature. But this isn't sufficient explanation. Someone has a reason for wanting to help out. But the reason I brought it up is to try to demonstrate why Helix isn't thinking right on this. And you haven't read my posts properly as I am not the person who would walk away. That would have seemed to be who Helix is, although he says now it isn't, there is a difference between before and after the event. Now I am trying to find out why.

 

But I think I will give up. Helix seems incapable of explaining exactly why he would save someone. He isn't explaining why he cares. I am not the one making things hard work and hard work for me to try to prize out any good explanation here.

[HeliX]

It's not minutiae. It is about being clear about what is being said. I have been clear. Whereas Helix is throwing a whole lot of things out there of which much I have not said.

And in your last post you mention about altruism and human nature. But this isn't sufficient explanation. Someone has a reason for wanting to help out. But the reason I brought it up is to try to demonstrate why Helix isn't thinking right on this. And you haven't read my posts properly as I am not the person who would walk away. That would have seemed to be who Helix is, although he says now it isn't, there is a difference between before and after the event. Now I am trying to find out why.

 

But I think I will give up. Helix seems incapable of explaining exactly why he would save someone. He isn't explaining why he cares. I am not the one making things hard work and hard work for me to try to prize out any good explanation here.

 

I would try to save them because it's a damnable shame when anyone feels so bad that they want to end their life. Nobody should ever have to feel that desperate, and if I can lessen the suffering of someone else then I should, because everyone deserves happiness.

 

However, as I've said several times, if they DID choose to end their life anyway, it sure as hell isn't anyone's place to say they did it out of "thinking poorly".

 

EDIT: Furthermore, I don't believe I'm making things up which you haven't said. You claim you haven't called the decision "wrong", but "thinking poorly" is hardly synonymous with "coming to the right decision", is it?

[Aquarius]

Helix - I think I am understanding you. Is it that you would try to talk them down because you care and would feel that you could maybe help, but that ultimately suicide is made from free choice by an independent individual and it is their unquestionable right to die if they so wish to in that manner and at that time?

[HeliX]

Helix - I think I am understanding you. Is it that you would try to talk them down because you care and would feel that you could maybe help, but that ultimately suicide is made from free choice by an independent individual and it is their unquestionable right to die if they so wish to in that manner and at that time?

 

Pretty much!

[Lxxx]

I wonder how long it'll be before Leveson gets in on the act and says we must have censorship and regulation of all free media, including radio as prime example, on the back of this incident?? It's coming.....

[Aquarius]

Helix - I think I am understanding you. Is it that you would try to talk them down because you care and would feel that you could maybe help,

but that ultimately suicide is made from free choice by an independent individual and it is their unquestionable right to die if they so wish to in that manner and at that time?

 

 

Pretty much!

 

 

Don't have a problem with that!

[La_Dolce_Vita]

You claim you haven't called the decision "wrong", but "thinking poorly" is hardly synonymous with "coming to the right decision", is it?

Wrong would apply a moral aspect to their decision and can imply that I am passing judgement over them. But thinking 'irrationally' or 'poorly' and recognising that this led them to make a bad decision refers to their state of mind and its products.

 

Again on the face of it, from what I can tell I don't think this woman was of sound mind here, she wasn't thinking rationally, and that led her to do something that she wouldn't do were she to be rational. A bad decision (for their sake) was made. (But again, we don't know the full facts here.)

 

All very weird from what we know already.

[HeliX]

You claim you haven't called the decision "wrong", but "thinking poorly" is hardly synonymous with "coming to the right decision", is it?

Wrong would apply a moral aspect to their decision and can imply that I am passing judgement over them. But thinking 'irrationally' or 'poorly' and recognising that this led them to make a bad decision refers to their state of mind and its products.

 

Again on the face of it, from what I can tell I don't think this woman was of sound mind here, she wasn't thinking rationally, and that led her to do something that she wouldn't do were she to be rational. A bad decision (for their sake) was made. (But again, we don't know the full facts here.)

 

All very weird from what we know already.

 

Sorry, my fault for not being clearer, I mean wrong in the sense of "incorrect" there.

 

I suspect we'll never know the full facts, though I would be surprised if this was the only thing wrong in her life.

[Lxxx]

I wonder how long it'll be before Leveson gets in on the act and says we must have censorship and regulation of all free media, including radio as prime example, on the back of this incident?? It's coming.....

 

Right on cue.....

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/12/12/leveson-internet-regulation_n_2283660.html

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Well any excuse to curb such freedoms would be grabbed. The problem is the moronic public who would actually think there should be bans or controls on this sort of thing.