School shooting in Finland

[AttheGates1996]

The kid's ideas about human extinction is commendable, plus he had the balls to take his own life instead of getting butt-fucked in jail.
Think about it, what he said about the demise of homo sapiens is the next step towards human evolution. No more humans on earth, at least there would be no more nations, no more mtv, no more crappy metal albums, isn't that what Prozak is always talking about, only death is real. Now that is true nihilism. Maybe some of you in this forum who preach too much about upholding Hessian ideals should follow in this kid's footsteps. Start acting and stop bitching.

The idea of human extinction may get rid of all the problems but so does learning to not let anger control you. Obviously, this is a true test of intellectual and emotional strength.

And he most certainly does not have any balls. I don’t give a shit what the consequences will be, if you have balls you wouldn’t run from the aftermath of your most important life decision like a coward.

Haven’t I previously stated in this forum that people just continue to follow Prozak and never actually think for themselves? Yes, I’ve said it fifty fucking times and have debated intensely about it with kontinual and then idiots like you come along and prove it. If you truly follow the Hessian ideals then why must you cite another person as a higher rank in power? You are no leader or free-thinker, just a follower.

[kontinual]

Haven’t I previously stated in this forum that people just continue to follow Prozak and never actually think for themselves? Yes, I’ve said it fifty fucking times and have debated intensely about it with kontinual and then idiots like you come along and prove it. If you truly follow the Hessian ideals then why must you cite another person as a higher rank in power? You are no leader or free-thinker, just a follower.

Nobody debated you about this.  You set yourself up as a kind of inconoclastic persecuted minority and decided your best recourse was to continue to play that role as a means to divert attention from real arguments.

Do all your ideas come exclusively from within, derived from your own experience?  Do you think Nietzsche was a follower and an asshole for admiring Schopenhauer or Emerson on some level publicly?  Was Plato a sheepish moron for drawing experience from Socrates?

Around here, we find it is more fun to talk about ideas than to obsess about the supposed personalities behind those ideas.  Using a name in reference to a thought is not automatically some fallacious appeal to authority for you to attack.

[Skjold]

The idea of human extinction may get rid of all the problems but so does learning to not let anger control you. Obviously, this is a true test of intellectual and emotional strength.

And he most certainly does not have any balls. I don’t give a shit what the consequences will be, if you have balls you wouldn’t run from the aftermath of your most important life decision like a coward.

You have no way of knowing if he was motivated by anger, some philosophical insight of divine intervention, so quit bringing it up. Only one person knew this, and he is now gone.

As for him being a coward, how is staying around to rot in jail being brave? I don't see anything particularly useful about it.

As for this guy, he sounds like he was halfway there (and that's about half way further then most people), but unfortunately seemed to find no way to do anything about the state of the world other than lashing out. It is a shame, as if he had perhaps had more patience he could have had more of an impact in the long run, ultimately now his action will now have no impact, as any symbolic statement in it will be bluntly converted to "he was angry and insane" by the crowd/media.

[born for banning]

If you truly follow the Hessian ideals then why must you cite another person as a higher rank in power?

What if you agree with them?

Do I have to invent some trivial variation on Nietzsche's theories just because he wrote them, and I don't want to be a follower?

You're following the image of not being a follower, but you are as controlled as any Dittohead out there.

[scourge]

Conformity to our postmodern mainstream expectations of individualism is pitiful. It's American democracy at the single unit voter scale, sans the organized lobbies that very much like the arrangement. Always being different has no potential even if one's arguments are the most sound. Concentrated interest trumps merit in our age.

[Heydrich]

It will take on the tone of shock for the sake of shock and be forgotten.

I'm not certain it hasn't been largely forgotton already in the US. This story dropped off the media radar screen in a day! It seems rather unlikely this fellow's actions will be anything but a mildly unpleasant memory for most within a week's time. Which given his apprent motivation is nothing if not tragically ironic...
If anything, in America, it will likely only stir up some predictable squabbling about gun-control and nothing more.  

[Christ Fucking Malarkey]

If only this young gentleman would have considered the words of his fellow countrymen, a little band called Sentenced, in lyrics written nearly fifteen years ago:

"The oath we had sworn gave us reason to live on..."

All paths lead to death; one need not hasten the process if this is something they understand, and if they have the potential to incorporate this meaningfully into their existence. Our weapon is knowledge, wisdom. To engage in acts of violence which result in the quenching of human lives only serves to affirm the superstitions of the masses. Our society is Hydra serpent that multiplies with each blow dealt to it. Effectively dealing with the problem will require Herculean efforts on behalf of anyone who is capable. Between our concrete, perceived "reality" and abstraction lies vast expanse of subtlety, the method employed by the Greek hero that ultimately led to his success in each challenge he undertook. It would serve us well to acquaint ourselves with this realm!

[pagan980938127]

I see a few conflicting thoughts on this story.

First, if he hadn't gone on a rampage and committed suicide, I wouldn't have read his "manifesto" - that is true.  Is that a valid excuse to go on a solitary rampage... phrased differently: is anyone actually going to digest this who didn't agree with it beforehand?  (I happen to hold several of his beliefs, excepting the adolescent misanthropia.)  What did I learn from this incident and what did society as a whole learn?

Personally, the answer is nothing.  He was obviously rather confused about the world.  He uses the word "hate" in the manifesto and to me, that implies a strong emotional connection to the human race, similar to a child who uses "I hate ..." when his parents take away his favorite toy and he's left helpless.  The child is not disconnected from the parents but painfully aware of the relationship - not every child behaves that way and I'd call the barrier between hate/violence vs. leadership an intellectual one.  Also my concept of nature as the forces of the universe, is that they're emotionless, cold, and never selfish (having in fact no guiding will).  That's why I'm a nihilist.  So I would claim that he was not a natural selector, but an artificial one, and ironically, may have been the primary target of nature.

Secondly, a difference between a child and a mature adult is being able to manage your emotions and redirect your passions toward productive outcomes.  This kid might have published books, led a revolution, halted environmental destruction, but instead chose to act in a short-sighted and selfish manner - suicide always results from the ego and internal conflict.  We have enough selfishness in the world now to call this behavior remarkable and least of all admirable.  Also to commit suicide is to admit defeat, defeat is a result of weakness, making his choice even less admirable.  A "smart" person would never consider suicide, because if you have life there are always opportunities to get what you want while making a positive change.

Third, the society he refers to has not seized this as an opportunity to discuss his ideas (see the speedy removal of his YouTube account and I expect his entire online identity will follow as the "investigation" unfolds).  He is being written out of existence, except for a caricature which will be propagated by mass media.  He has only served to strengthen that which he hated.  There will not be any mass uprising, no destruction of modern society.  Surely an intelligent person could have foreseen this.  Don't confuse recklessness with bravery.

Finally, to be only 18 years old and convinced the world is without hope is a position of absolute ignorance (or the best case: a lucky guess).

[LingNemesis]

The above post summarises what I have in mind exactly.

Those kids need time to calm down and think logically if their actions would really make a difference or not.

[buckets_of_rain]

Those kids need time to calm down and think logically if their actions would really make a difference or not.

Yes they need to learn to ignore their problems and live long lives in society and not take any action on their beliefs

Parden the sarcasm.  

Let me throw in a breif thought.  When you people talk about thinking about consequences, you must have in mind that the point of life is to live long and be close to your family.  Is that what you want the point of your life to be.  This man, whether ignorant or not, came up with his own view of the world and decided to define his life by it.  It ended up making his life rather short but he achieved more, whether he achieved what he wanted to or not, than any quiet person who complains on message boards.  

I think his consequences matched his goal.  It might have been a dumb goal to some here, but he died by the sword for what he believed in.

[oogaa]

"dying by the sword for what he believed in' doesn't justify his belief. The 9/11 bombers actually believed that they would be going to heaven and be greeted by virgins when they do what they did. Does that mean that taking down two towers takes you to heaven and you'll get to bang some virgins? Or does that mean that we should condone their actions simply because they died by the sword for that they believed in?

[born for banning]

He uses the word "hate" in the manifesto and to me, that implies a strong emotional connection to the human race, similar to a child who uses "I hate ..." when his parents take away his favorite toy and he's left helpless.
...
Finally, to be only 18 years old and convinced the world is without hope is a position of absolute ignorance (or the best case: a lucky guess).

Human race? Do you mean human species?

Next, I think being 18 years old and convinced the world is without hope is an informed position. If one survives some years of that, the question becomes how to enlarge whatever hope it is, as just about anything is higher than zero... but the world is headed toward suicide.

I don't have a problem with connection to humanity. I think it's obvious we're connected to humanity. Buddhists and quasi-overmen can transcend in their own imaginations, and what? The march to doom continues. It takes a different kind of overman to be both human and higher-striving.

[buckets_of_rain]

"dying by the sword for what he believed in' doesn't justify his belief. The 9/11 bombers actually believed that they would be going to heaven and be greeted by virgins when they do what they did. Does that mean that taking down two towers takes you to heaven and you'll get to bang some virgins? Or does that mean that we should condone their actions simply because they died by the sword for that they believed in?

Well I said you may or may not agree with his goal.  the point is, unlike the rest of us who just complain on message boards, he took action for what he believed in, meaning his life has more meaning that all those who just stay quiet and do nothing.  

What's interesting is that once you realize that there are no laws outside man's laws, you realize that there is no need to justify one's own beliefs.  They are your beliefs because you believe in them.  His action is what justifies it, for his action is what set it in stone.  

I don't see anything wrong with what he did.  He didn't know any better to do anything with more results and he wasn't going to sit around and wait to think of something.

Maybe we all should have shot up our schools.  Maybe the mass killing would have opened some eyes.  Maybe not though.  I guess we'll all get old now.

[Late]

Well, living here and seeing the media coverage for the incident. Personally, I saw he had some good points in his "final statement" but on the other hand it was a dramatic suicide played out by an unhappy teen (many people will probably disagree with me here but he seemed to pass judgment on things he had no knowldege about) and the problem is, because of his violent "going out" I can't see that (my society) will discuss the topics at hand (that he addressed) in  a constructive manner but they (the powers that be, that is) will have a tendency to focus on stuff that tries to uphold the status quo.

 

[detrath]

"Well I said you may or may not agree with his goal.  the point is, unlike the rest of us who just complain on message boards, he took action for what he believed in, meaning his life has more meaning that all those who just stay quiet and do nothing."

Does a person who acts on their beliefs inherently have more meaning to their life than a person who does not do so? A proud capitalist-oriented man who believes only in the value of the dollar will act on that belief to destroy a forest. Does his life have more meaning than someone who is not so destructive (whatever precisely meaning means)? If for a life to have meaning, it means something like "made an impact on reality", then all the selfish destructive acts are just as meaningful as valuable constructive ones. Perhaps this is what you mean by meaning, but if that is the case, it is a poor criteria to judge the value of an action, for it inherently ignores the value of an action, and I think we need to decide what is valuable and not ignore it. Meaning in the sense of impact alone is not going to be enough.

"What's interesting is that once you realize that there are no laws outside man's laws, you realize that there is no need to justify one's own beliefs.  They are your beliefs because you believe in them.  His action is what justifies it, for his action is what set it in stone."

So you're saying my beliefs do not need to be justified in some abstract way because there are no laws that govern what beliefs I will or wont have. I can hold whatever beliefs I want. You emphasize that you mean something like this when you emphasize that the beliefs are possessed, "they are your beliefs because you believe in them". You then seem to believe that a belief is justified if it can be put into action. So a justified belief is one that has been put into action.

This seems to be a path to ignoring reality. Think about beliefs about what action should be taken. If I believe the way to put out a fire is to throw gasoline on it, that belief will be justified as true or corresponding to reality or however you want to talk about it based on the fact that I throw gasoline on the fire. It seems very strange to say this, that that belief was justified because I acted on it. It seems like my belief would be justified if I had a reason for holding it, if it was verified somehow. The contents of what I believed turn out to be false, afterall. The gasoline just makes the fire worse.

So it's true that we can believe whatever we want (in some free or unfree sense of want), and that they are -our- beliefs because we are the ones believing them, but the jump to the belief itself being justified (which is inherently going to have something to do with getting onto reality or truth or something like that) because it was followed through seems a bit crazy. Not all beliefs are equal. Not all beliefs are equally justified, that is, not all beliefs get onto reality equally.

"I don't see anything wrong with what he did.  He didn't know any better to do anything with more results and he wasn't going to sit around and wait to think of something."

I live in the forest and there are wolves about. I need to build a fence to keep them out. There are many sensible paths to building a fence. Unfortunately, I don't know what they are. In fact, I'm entirely ignorant of the fence option. I only know that I hate (and fear) the wolves and the consequences they bring about, so I attack them and am promptly devoured afterward. I wasn't going to sit around and wait to think of something. I wasn't patient enough to think the situation through.

Ignorance and impatient lazy thinking does not make my poor choice of action any less poor, even if I was somehow destined or determined to make that poor choice.

"Maybe we all should have shot up our schools.  Maybe the mass killing would have opened some eyes.  Maybe not though.  I guess we'll all get old now. "

This is only sensible based on your erroneous assumption about the equality of how close to reality all beliefs get.

The answer to inaction is not action for its own sake, action at any price. Action alone should not be so dogmatically pursued.