[Buddha-l] Re: Gog and Magog

[Dan Lusthaus]

Richard,

As someone who from time to time teaches logic, you know better than that.
Just because people can attach to multitudes of different perspectives
doesn't make each of those perspectives equally valid, much less equally
true, no matter how firmly adherents hold those views. What should we call
the fallacy that assumes such false parity?

There is a very sound adage that says one judges others by their actions,
not their words. I offered three very clear moments -- that could have been
decisive in settling the conflict -- and we can see clearly how each party
acted and, without much strain, identify motives and consequences. No
post-modern interpretive overlays are necessary, unless one wishes to avoid
the obvious.

If there is any validity to what you depict as an equally valid perspective,
name a single -- just a single -- material concession made by the
Palestinians since 1947. Just one. Then remind me of a single conflict
anywhere or anytime in which the loser dictated the peace terms. Then we can
return to the question of what role "parity" plays in the rhetoric.

I prefer to argue with evidence.

Dan