Hoplophobia, (pronounced [ˌhɔpləˈfoʊbiə]), from the Greek hoplon, or weapon, is defined as the “fear of firearms” or alternatively, a fear of weapons in general
an·thro·po·pho·bia
Pronunciation: -(")pO-'fO-bE-&
Function: noun
: a pathological fear of people or human companionship
I only bring these things up because of all the outcry — usually from people on the left — about people carrying guns to events attended to by the president.
I understand the security concern here and it is the responsibility of the Secret Service to handle the president’s safety. Notably, I understand from HLN that guns are not permitted on federal sites and wherever the president is is a federal site, so we should be clear that no one has actually brought a gun into the president’s presence. They’ve simply brought guns near to where the president is. And they aren’t waving them around menacingly. They’re just carrying them. And as far as I know, none of these people have threatened to kill the president.
As an aside: it seems to me that once upon a time MOST of the people at political events were carrying guns. Some how there managed to be a minimum of slaughter, too.
This makes me wonder about all the people who are freaking out about this. What’s the problem here? The only explanation I can come up with is that there seems to be a pervasive, irrational fear of guns, hoplophobia, out among our fellow Americans.
I know everyone is familiar with the debate around our right to bear arms, so I think this irrational fear of guns is reflective of a deeper, irrational fear: anthropophobia, a fear of other people.
What difference does it make if someone else has a gun? Do you have any reason to think some particular other person is going to shoot you?
Anti-gun folks will likely respond pointing out that there are crazies out there who really might shoot the president or anyone they just feel like shooting. Isn’t that always the case with crazies, though? Crazies might also try to bite your face off, but we don’t go around knocking everyone else’s teeth out, do we? But that’s what these anti-gun folks would do. This idea that guns have to be prohibited because of crazies implies that everyone is a crazy and I resent the implication. I am not a crazy. I do not have any intention of shooting the president and I don’t believe those other people at those rallies do, either.
So, it really comes down to these people fearing other people. They’re really just scared of everyone. I suppose if you’re inclined to make everyone your slave to pay for your health insurance, your bankrupt company, your union, your overpriced farm crops, or whatever… you have some good reasons to be afraid of your fellow man.
You may have a point.
I’m not sure how would you accurately guage whether wide spread anthropophobia (or other sub-optimal psychologies) exist?
I think I can be quick to assume people are like how I used to be as a left leaning Christian teenager long before I discovered egoism.
Anyway, regarding this gun scare issue. I just thought your typical lefty wants Obama to appear like a “virtuous” victim as opposed to the force initiating facist (that he actually is).
The power of modern ethics.
Incidentally, it’s so frustrating the way the main stream media obsessively focuses on minor, non-essential stories. eg/ The birther issue. I suspect this falls into the same category.
Well, to be perfectly clear, I think this anthropophobia is less a psychological condition than a philosophical one.
OK, it looks like I’ve said the same thing as you then. Ie: Flawed (philosophy) ethical theory leads to a psychological manifestation – fear of other humans.
I’m fairly new to Objectivism (finding it very interesting at the moment), but I’m a bit confused on the philosophy of the left leaning prohibitionist.
Would you class the epistemology of a typical democrat as being a subjectivist and/or pragmatist?
And then what is the link to them fearing others? (I am accepting that widespread psychological issues such as fear and guilt are common, something I do believe to be true)
I suppose it must be a belief in the potency of evil – a result of divorcing ethics from fundamental empirical observations of man’s life and nature.
So in the case of typical lefty, is this the mind body dichotomy at work? – ie: what’s efficacious in the real world can not be prescribed by an ethical theory. Therefore someone could actually benefit from evil and even initiate the shooting of another? And this then leads stereotype lefty to believe people are likely to act in evil ways?
But then again, don’t subjectivists think ethics are realtive? Why do typical lefties value ethics? Is it simply a belief in the authority of collective and that there is a conflict between what’s good for you and what’s good for everyone?
I’m going to go look this up in OPAR.
With typical righty it seems very clear to me. ie: the dogmatic idea of original sin, people are inherently evil, unclean blah blah. Combined with the fact that all religions worship a higher power. I’d say whenever a higher power exists, sacrifice follows. Sacrifice is detrimental by definition and therefore evil becomes potent.
Do you smoke?
Absolutely not.
I heard about the big storm in NYC and the damage it did to Central Park? What type of impact did it have on you? I am intersted in hearing more about your neighbors–they have maids?
I love storms, so I enjoyed it a lot. It otherwise did not affect me.
My neighbors in my building don’t really have maids. The maids I watch are the ones in the building across the alley from my office. I see them while I am working.
I’ve always wanted to be a hotel maid maybe for a few days or a week or something in a nice hotel.
Colin, that is perhaps your strangest non sequitur to date!