|
|
Post by motleycruesader on Sept 3, 2018 18:33:20 GMT -5
Yes, they are inferior and we are superior. Morality is not subjective. There is a baseline to the standards of human behavior. Really? Do you really want to go there with me, the great recorder of mankinds many sins? Because the biggest violator of those standards is still western civilization. In fact, the sheer number of times the US has violated those standards since 1900 is...well... damning. So, how many genocides and corrective rape campaigns, child enslavement, etc. have we perpetuated since 1900? I'll wait. We're ahead in the game. Objectively. Sorry, but you won't convince me there's an excuse for baby-fucking and beating women being supported by law. And since 1900... yeah, we... don't have slavery, either. |
|
|
|
Post by Hellfury on Sept 3, 2018 18:35:25 GMT -5
how old is this forums software? It depends on who you ask. I'm not sure if Proboards took over EzBoards, but if so... then the answer is decades. But this one, in particular, about 15 years old. But there is a definite weirdness that wasn't present while this forum was active. It's not high on my priority list, but I may be able to fix it. |
|
|
|
Post by motleycruesader on Sept 3, 2018 18:36:02 GMT -5
Morality is objective? Prove it. Bag me up an ounce of morality. Empirically or rationally demonstrate its existence separate from humanity. If it's an immutable law of the Universe (unlike those systems of belief you're denigrating), you should be able to do so.
So, you're okay with raping kids. All I needed to know. The only thing that keeps you from doing so is a man in a uniform of some sort may kill or capture you and put you in a cage. |
|
|
|
Post by Hellfury on Sept 3, 2018 18:38:03 GMT -5
Hmm I'm starting to see why Dakka decided to nuke RSP forum from orbit.
|
|
|
|
Post by motleycruesader on Sept 3, 2018 18:41:18 GMT -5
Hmm I'm starting to see why Dakka decided to nuke RSP forum from orbit. Most of the people here seem well-grounded. I think things will be a bit different since people realize that this won't be protected by someone crying to a mod about mean words. |
|
|
|
Post by mrmystic on Sept 3, 2018 18:43:23 GMT -5
That's nothing to do with the meaning of the word 'objective'. You asserted morality was objective, and that therefore, you could stick a pin in the morality chart to prove your culture's morals were more 'advanced' along it than those of others. Words have meanings.
Either you can prove morality is objective (sic; something that actually exists independently of humans and their imagined realities and beliefs), or you can't. And if you can't, your morality is subjective; meaning that the only way it is more 'advanced' is in your head. Aka, the usual arrogant typical belief of every generation and culture that has ever existed that their way of doing things is the 'right' and 'advanced' and 'moral' way.
Which in turn means attempts to export it to the rest of the world nicely packaged up as 'advanced civilisation' are what they've always been; standard cultural imperialism.
I personally think Western culture is great in that in tends to enable people to do what they like without facing scarring circumstances. I would like to see it everywhere because I like the idea of everyone having a decent base level of existence instead of only the rich/powerful/male/right colour. I abhor any kind of rape or suchlike.
But I still remain aware that it's all in the heads of myself and those around me. I know perfectly well that the goal of culture is always to subsume, absorb, and replicate itself elsewhere like a virus. The American cultural behemoth is terrifying. Even countries that previously had massive independent cultural impetus like Britain and France have ended up tangled up in it. For all the smaller countries/nations that barely had a identity to begin with? They've been utterly ground under; trained to want T-shirts and big-macs, to sign up to international legal systems their native values had no part of making, to ape the American conceptual ideals of beauty and success. Current Western morality systems are merely a smaller facet of that.
|
|
|
|
Post by motleycruesader on Sept 3, 2018 18:49:04 GMT -5
Either you can prove morality is objective (sic; something that actually exists independently of humans and their imagined realities and beliefs), or you can't. And if you can't, your morality is subjective; meaning that the only way it is more 'advanced' is in your head. Aka, the usual arrogant typical belief of every generation and culture that has ever existed that their way of doing things is the 'right' and 'advanced' and 'moral' way. Independently of humans? No, it cannot. I chose my words poorly. However, this does not change the way things are- we advance. We don't just get new ideas and stick with them for fun. We IMPROVE society. And we, in my opinion, have the better civilization and our advancements- tangible, observable advances- demonstrate we're on to something. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2018 18:50:29 GMT -5
So, how many genocides and corrective rape campaigns, child enslavement, etc. have we perpetuated since 1900? I'll wait. We're ahead in the game. Objectively. Sorry, but you won't convince me there's an excuse for baby-fucking and beating women being supported by law. And since 1900... yeah, we... don't have slavery, either.
Women beating was supported by law in the US until 1920.
There is actually is a legal means to own slaves in the US, as long as they're felons. Illegal slaves held in the US are estimated to be in the tens of thousands by law enforcement. This does include children.
While arguably the US has not directly participated in genocide (as you most likely define it) you did help the Nazis commit theirs, as letting in fleeing Jews would have violated immigration quotas. Less than 500 of the thousands that the US returned to Germany survived the camps.
You may not have a rape campaign, but you did run a corrective forced sterilization campaign or two. Mostly against blacks in the south.
Human experimentation was a big one for the US, with the poor, blacks, and prisoners popular choices. You also ran germ warfare experiments on civilians in South America.
|
|
|
|
Post by motleycruesader on Sept 3, 2018 18:52:52 GMT -5
Women beating was supported by law in the US until 1920.
There is actually is a legal means to own slaves in the US, as long as they're felons. Illegal slaves held in the US are estimated to be in the tens of thousands by law enforcement. This does include children.
While arguably the US has not directly participated in genocide (as you most likely define it) you did help the Nazis commit theirs, as letting in fleeing Jews would have violated immigration quotas. Less than 500 of the thousands that the US returned to Germany survived the camps.
You may not have a rape campaign, but you did run a corrective forced sterilization campaign or two. Mostly against blacks in the south.
We are not perfect. None of this was widespread and approved, and all of these issues were not favored by the majority of the population.
Rape was punishable by death until the 70's, as was Child Molestation.
Felons performing hard labor are not 'slaves', they forfeit their right to live freely when they harm others.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrmystic on Sept 3, 2018 19:00:25 GMT -5
Either you can prove morality is objective (sic; something that actually exists independently of humans and their imagined realities and beliefs), or you can't. And if you can't, your morality is subjective; meaning that the only way it is more 'advanced' is in your head. Aka, the usual arrogant typical belief of every generation and culture that has ever existed that their way of doing things is the 'right' and 'advanced' and 'moral' way. Independently of humans? No, it cannot. I chose my words poorly. However, this does not change the way things are- we advance. We don't just get new ideas and stick with them for fun. We IMPROVE society. And we, in my opinion, have the better civilization and our advancements- tangible, observable advances- demonstrate we're on to something. Okay. Let's examine that concept a spot closer.
Breaking apart the meaning of the word 'advance'; it would usually mean (without consulting a dictionary) to progress in some way, to move 'forwards', to 'improve' as you put it. The question has to then be; who determines what counts as 'advancement'? Who decides what things count as contributing towards it? If I bring in a policy of social reform; some will decry it as the invasive state, others the necessary 'cradle to grave' action. Who gets to determine which of these things is right?
The answer is; nobody. Everyone has an opinion, and none of them is intrinsically objectively worth anything more than any other. And that's just in one culture. Spread it outwards on a global scale, and it becomes rapidly apparent that anything you could count as contributing towards your 'advances', or qualifying as an 'improvement'; another person can perceive in the opposite way. And their opinion holds equivalent weight to yours; that is to say, neither has any weight at all. Because they're both just beliefs and opinions.
There is no objective road map of culture or morality to judge either our own or another one by. You can choose to believe that your culture is more advanced and moral; but that's all it is. A thought in your head in one tiny spot in the Universe; on a mote of dust suspended by a sunbeam.
|
|
|
|
Post by motleycruesader on Sept 3, 2018 19:04:04 GMT -5
Are you implying that we don't create laws and a system of ethics based on actual scientific, observable fact? Like, as in- understanding how human beings and the world around us functions, and how our actions have an impact on it?
We don't make laws based on 'feels'.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2018 19:14:16 GMT -5
Quote screwed up weirdly.
True, but there's a legal distinction between losing one's right to live freely and being compelled into forced labor without recompense. Under the 13th Amendment's Punishment Clause, these men may be forced into slavery. In fact, there was a big business in leasing convicts throughout the South as a replacement for freed slaves. This practice continued until FDR prohibited it in 1941. However, Circular No. 3591 is basically as thin as any other directive to the Justice Department. Trump could eliminate it with the stroke of a pen.
|
|
|
|
Post by motleycruesader on Sept 3, 2018 19:16:06 GMT -5
Quote screwed up weirdly.
True, but there's a legal distinction between losing one's right to live freely and being compelled into forced labor without recompense. Under the 13th Amendment's Punishment Clause, these men may be forced into slavery. In fact, there was a big business in leasing convicts throughout the South as a replacement for freed slaves. This practice continued until FDR prohibited it in 1941. However, Circular No. 3591 is basically as thin as any other directive to the Justice Department. Trump could eliminate it with the stroke of a pen.
Guess we should've listened when people were saying that Executive Orders being signed into law so easily isn't a good thing. I don't favor Trump much, I did like Obama. But those 'crazy right wingers' are blind squirrels that find a nut every once in a while. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2018 19:16:21 GMT -5
We don't make laws based on 'feels'. Looks at above statement, looks at Trump administration..... Um, about that...
|
|
|
|
Post by motleycruesader on Sept 3, 2018 19:22:27 GMT -5
We don't make laws based on 'feels'. Looks at above statement, looks at Trump administration..... Um, about that...
Sounds like every administration since... ever. |
|
