in thinking about my reply to this topic...
i realized that i was bound and condemned by
the definition (or loss of a concise definition)
to the term 'victim'.
what clearly defines a 'victim'?
where is the line drawn?
9-11 "victims" are they really victims?
I think not!
in thinking about my reply to this topic...
i realized that i was bound and condemned by
the definition (or loss of a concise definition)
to the term 'victim'.
what clearly defines a 'victim'?
where is the line drawn?
which victims?
the people who lost their lives in the towers?
the people who lost their lives on planes?
the people who lost their lives trying to rescue others?
america?
the people who hijacked the plane?
by the way. the new WTC buildings are so egotistically ridiculous, arrogant and 'heroic' that i am quite sure we'll experience a bit of de ja vu in years to come.
all those Qs are what i'm trying to determine...
er... when i use the term 'victim'.
i'm not really sure what constitutes a 'victim'.
Would people who think they are a victim be a victim?
it seems so.
but that can only be true from a 1st person's sense...
as in "what do i think of myself?"
but what about 3rd person?
as in "what do i think about he/she.... him/her... them?"
For some reason i'm getting the overpowering urge to get a dictionary and see the 'formal' definition of victim, seeing how it's a (not excusively) human view of things and not something an sich.
I could say I was victimized by a smog technician, who crashed my car while he was driving it, and then
refused to pay to fix it, or to even acknowledge responsibility.
But I HATE to call myself a victim, because victim means I have accepted my fate and won't try and change or correct what has happened.
Yes, the WTC casualties were victims because they many had no way to escape.
However, one could also say that using a cell phone to sell shares in venture capital projects that ultimately scar land and harm environmentally pristine and delicate ecosystems half way across the world is also a form of victimization.
Perhaps the WTC casualties, and lets add all of the countries partaking in the Industrial Revolution, are victims of largess. We do our jobs, not having a true say in what the job is, and if we don't do our job, we will be homeless.
Just following orders? [img]rolleyes.gif[/img]
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">there's always deathOriginally posted by Alex:
Yes, the WTC casualties were victims because they many had no way to escape.
but no, the 'casualties' of the wtc were not vitcims...
as it is incomplete to generalize.... mainly because
only a handfull of people genuinely understood
that they were about to die.... THEY were victims...
those in the wtc.... there were merely a number
well, my quote and your response have some typos.
I would define victim as someone who has no recourse. Dying not being an viable option.
<font color="#6699ff" size="1">[ September 15, 2003 03:48 AM: Message edited by: Alex ]</font>
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks