|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 13, 2018 0:00:17 GMT
tpfkar Well, as I posted as examples about the Catholic Church evolving with a new more progressive Pope, and even the Muslim religion gathering more moderates, I guess I was hoping for people to help me analyse trends. So yes, a broader social picture. Graham identified increasing a wider circle of 'us' in the 'us' and 'them' tribalism debate. The growth of secularism especially in the most successfully advanced countries such as those in Scandinavia and northern Europe, the growth of globalisation etc. That kind of thing, and whether it is led by evolution of 'morality' or something else. Are you hinting at an idea of "progress"? I think it's important to not see evolution as suggesting "progress." "Evolution" is a broader-used word than only the scientific fact and theory, of course. Oxford Comma
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 13, 2018 0:04:36 GMT
tpfkar Are you hinting at an idea of "progress"? I think it's important to not see evolution as suggesting "progress." "Evolution" is a broader-used word than only the scientific fact and theory, of course. Oxford Comma"Progress" is subjective.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 13, 2018 0:07:59 GMT
tpfkar "Evolution" is a broader-used word than only the scientific fact and theory, of course. Oxford Comma"Progress" is subjective. So what? All the evolution she was referring to in her post was "progress". Kill the Poor
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 13, 2018 0:13:11 GMT
tpfkar "Progress" is subjective. So what? All the evolution she was referring to in her post was "progress". Kill the PoorSo if you try to attach the notion of progress to the term "evolution," you wind up only asking people whether they prefer the changes in question or not. That's not a very fruitful discussion to have re the evolution of anything, which is why we don't attach notions of progress to it, whether we're talking about biological evolution or not.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 13, 2018 0:19:01 GMT
tpfkar So what? All the evolution she was referring to in her post was "progress". Kill the PoorSo if you try to attach the notion of progress to the term "evolution," you wind up only asking people whether they prefer the changes in question or not. That's not a very fruitful discussion to have re the evolution of anything, which is why we don't attach notions of progress to it, whether we're talking about biological evolution or not. Nah, you can attach the notion of progress to evolution in a positive direction, especially in the way she's using it. More moderates / fewer extremists, more prosperity, less tribalism are all progress. Doesn't matter if some fringe minority finds good things bad and vice versa. Laws control the lesser man... Right conduct controls the greater one.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 13, 2018 0:33:51 GMT
Nah, you can attach the notion of progress to evolution in a positive direction, That's a nonsensical comment. The whole idea of progress is that it's positive. It would be like saying, "You can use a notion of 'good' that's positive." There's no non-positive notion of "good" (at least not in any conventional usage, that would make any sense of common talk about "good.") At any rate, you can attach a notion of progress to evolution, but the reason that we do not do that is because progress is subjective, and you wind up simply asking people if they prefer the changes in question. I just explained that. That's progress if you prefer those changes. If you do not, it's not progress. Good and bad are about subjective preferences.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 13, 2018 0:35:54 GMT
Well, as I posted as examples about the Catholic Church evolving with a new more progressive Pope, and even the Muslim religion gathering more moderates, I guess I was hoping for people to help me analyse trends. So yes, a broader social picture. Graham identified increasing a wider circle of 'us' in the 'us' and 'them' tribalism debate. The growth of secularism especially in the most successfully advanced countries such as those in Scandinavia and northern Europe, the growth of globalisation etc. That kind of thing, and whether it is led by evolution of 'morality' or something else. Are you hinting at an idea of "progress"? I think it's important to not see evolution as suggesting "progress." No, not at all. More evolutionary in terms of change. 'Progress' is in the eye of the beholder. All the examples I have given are controversial.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 13, 2018 0:41:18 GMT
tpfkar Nah, you can attach the notion of progress to evolution in a positive direction, That's a nonsensical comment. The whole idea of progress is that it's positive. It would be like saying, "You can use a notion of 'good' that's positive." There's no non-positive notion of "good" (at least not in any conventional usage, that would make any sense of common talk about "good.") At any rate, you can attach a notion of progress to evolution, but the reason that we do not do that is because progress is subjective, and you wind up simply asking people if they prefer the changes in question. I just explained that. That's progress if you prefer those changes. If you do not, it's not progress. Good and bad are about subjective preferences. No, your whole line is nonsensical. Much like your idea that your obtuse conveyances "explain" anything. Everything we judge is subjective; it's the most useless thing to bring up in a conversation for most anything save somebody claiming the superiority of some objective outside the colloquial shared subjective. It's a fact that those listed things, much like flourishing are all considered positives by those we consider to be halfway not bent. And for anyone not wed to continuous semantical basket weaving would be able to tell that more moderates / less tribalism, successfully advanced countries, etc. is positive evolution. I knew Doris Day before she was a virgin.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 13, 2018 0:50:40 GMT
Are you hinting at an idea of "progress"? I think it's important to not see evolution as suggesting "progress." No, not at all. More evolutionary in terms of change. 'Progress' is in the eye of the beholder. All the examples I have given are controversial. Okay, but clearly morality is always changing, because as I said, it's a complex of individual judgments, influenced by social interactions (of other individuals with their own judgments), and each one of those individuals is different from each other. So as individuals change--some are born, some die, and as time goes on--those individuals have different judgments throughout their lives, and as they interact with each other in complex, mathematically chaotic ways, both the total set of individual morality as well as socially dominant stances are always changing.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 13, 2018 0:54:55 GMT
tpfkar That's a nonsensical comment. The whole idea of progress is that it's positive. It would be like saying, "You can use a notion of 'good' that's positive." There's no non-positive notion of "good" (at least not in any conventional usage, that would make any sense of common talk about "good.") At any rate, you can attach a notion of progress to evolution, but the reason that we do not do that is because progress is subjective, and you wind up simply asking people if they prefer the changes in question. I just explained that. That's progress if you prefer those changes. If you do not, it's not progress. Good and bad are about subjective preferences. No, your whole line is nonsensical. Much like your idea that your obtuse conveyances "explain" anything. Everything we judge is subjective; it's the most useless thing to bring up in a conversation for most anything save somebody claiming the superiority of some objective outside the colloquial shared subjective. It's a fact that those listed things, much like flourishing are all considered positives by those we consider to be halfway not bent. And for anyone not wed to continuous semantical basket weaving would be able to tell that more moderates / less tribalism, successfully advanced countries, etc. is positive evolution. I knew Doris Day before she was a virgin.That some opinions are more popular than others has no significance aside from the fact that those opinions are more popular. It doesn't give them any more (objective) weight than other opinions or make them right or anything like that. (It can or can not give them more subjective weight to particular individuals--it just depends on their opinion about that.) There's nothing that "really" counts as progress. It counts as progress to some individual just in case they prefer those changes. Otherwise it doesn't count as progress to them.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 13, 2018 0:55:44 GMT
No, not at all. More evolutionary in terms of change. 'Progress' is in the eye of the beholder. All the examples I have given are controversial. Okay, but clearly morality is always changing, because as I said, it's a complex of individual judgments, influenced by social interactions (of other individuals with their own judgments), and each one of those individuals is different from each other. So as individuals change--some are born, some die, and as time goes on--those individuals have different judgments throughout their lives, and as they interact with each other in complex, mathematically chaotic ways, both the total set of individual morality as well as socially dominant stances are always changing. Yes...and from each individual's point of view, it would be good to actually have those changes seen as progress.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 13, 2018 0:58:04 GMT
Okay, but clearly morality is always changing, because as I said, it's a complex of individual judgments, influenced by social interactions (of other individuals with their own judgments), and each one of those individuals is different from each other. So as individuals change--some are born, some die, and as time goes on--those individuals have different judgments throughout their lives, and as they interact with each other in complex, mathematically chaotic ways, both the total set of individual morality as well as socially dominant stances are always changing. Yes...and from each individual's point of view, it would be good to actually have those changes seen as progress. There are always a lot of people on various sides of that for any change.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 13, 2018 1:07:37 GMT
tpfkar No, your whole line is nonsensical. Much like your idea that your obtuse conveyances "explain" anything. Everything we judge is subjective; it's the most useless thing to bring up in a conversation for most anything save somebody claiming the superiority of some objective outside the colloquial shared subjective. It's a fact that those listed things, much like flourishing are all considered positives by those we consider to be halfway not bent. And for anyone not wed to continuous semantical basket weaving would be able to tell that more moderates / less tribalism, successfully advanced countries, etc. is positive evolution. I knew Doris Day before she was a virgin.That some opinions are more popular than others has no significance aside from the fact that those opinions are more popular. It doesn't give them any more (objective) weight than other opinions or make them right or anything like that. (It can or can not give them more subjective weight to particular individuals--it just depends on their opinion about that.) There's nothing that "really" counts as progress. It counts as progress to some individual just in case they prefer those changes. Otherwise it doesn't count as progress to them. Regardless of whether you wish to equalize all "opinions" via the useless repetition that they're subjective (no judgement isn't) or that it's just what's "popular", or those people just don't understand your particular kinks, the broad strokes we hold have massive weight that is enforced by society, often forcefully, sometimes terminally. There's no such thing as objective weight. And there are clearly a whole class of "opinions" that the bulk hold, even mortal enemies, whether the bent fringe dream of theirs being at equal level or not. If somebody has sex with a person who's passed out, without consent beforehand, but doesn't cause any injuries (suppose the victim doesn't even realize what's happened until being informed afterwards, say because somebody took a video of the incident), what do you think the appropriate punishment would be? Probably not more than, say, 40 hours of community service. (And by the way, I'd make community service basically be free labor on public works projects.)
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 13, 2018 1:08:14 GMT
Yes...and from each individual's point of view, it would be good to actually have those changes seen as progress. There are always a lot of people on various sides of that for any change. Yes, and in sociological and historical terms I find it fascinating. To me it is truly evolutionary, the patterns of human thought, beliefs and morals and how they are evolving. You only have to look at things on a timeline of animism, religion, diverse religions, coming out of the dark ages, the renaissance, the reformation, age of enlightenment, industrial revolution, democracy, socialism, Nazism, cold war, technological revolution, globalism..............with many bumps in the road.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 13, 2018 11:55:06 GMT
tpfkar That some opinions are more popular than others has no significance aside from the fact that those opinions are more popular. It doesn't give them any more (objective) weight than other opinions or make them right or anything like that. (It can or can not give them more subjective weight to particular individuals--it just depends on their opinion about that.) There's nothing that "really" counts as progress. It counts as progress to some individual just in case they prefer those changes. Otherwise it doesn't count as progress to them. Regardless of whether you wish to equalize all "opinions" via the useless repetition that they're subjective (no judgement isn't) or that it's just what's "popular", or those people just don't understand your particular kinks, the broad strokes we hold have massive weight that is enforced by society, often forcefully, sometimes terminally. There's no such thing as objective weight. And there are clearly a whole class of "opinions" that the bulk hold, even mortal enemies, whether the bent fringe dream of theirs being at equal level or not. If somebody has sex with a person who's passed out, without consent beforehand, but doesn't cause any injuries (suppose the victim doesn't even realize what's happened until being informed afterwards, say because somebody took a video of the incident), what do you think the appropriate punishment would be? Probably not more than, say, 40 hours of community service. (And by the way, I'd make community service basically be free labor on public works projects.)What is that supposed to have to do with some things counting as progress versus other things, the fruitfulness of a conversation about that, and whether and why we normally attach a notion of progress to evolution in contexts such as morality?
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 13, 2018 15:11:14 GMT
tpfkar That some opinions are more popular than others has no significance aside from the fact that those opinions are more popular. It doesn't give them any more (objective) weight than other opinions or make them right or anything like that. (It can or can not give them more subjective weight to particular individuals--it just depends on their opinion about that.) There's nothing that "really" counts as progress. It counts as progress to some individual just in case they prefer those changes. Otherwise it doesn't count as progress to them. Regardless of whether you wish to equalize all "opinions" via the useless repetition that they're subjective (no judgement isn't) or that it's just what's "popular", or those people just don't understand your particular kinks, the broad strokes we hold have massive weight that is enforced by society, often forcefully, sometimes terminally. There's no such thing as objective weight. And there are clearly a whole class of "opinions" that the bulk hold, even mortal enemies, whether the bent fringe dream of theirs being at equal level or not. If somebody has sex with a person who's passed out, without consent beforehand, but doesn't cause any injuries (suppose the victim doesn't even realize what's happened until being informed afterwards, say because somebody took a video of the incident), what do you think the appropriate punishment would be? Probably not more than, say, 40 hours of community service. (And by the way, I'd make community service basically be free labor on public works projects.)What is that supposed to have to do with some things counting as progress versus other things, the fruitfulness of a conversation about that, and whether and why we normally attach a notion of progress to evolution in contexts such as morality? 1) I don't care what you think is "fruitful" or not, of course. 2) The reply was specifically to your reply again nattering on "subjective", when all judgement is subjective, yapping about objective weights which don't exist, and silly gassing like nothing "really" counts as progress. 3) In fact we can and do attach the notion of progress to evolution in a positive direction. 4) It's a fact that those listed things, much like flourishing are all considered positives by those we consider to be halfway not bent. 5) Regardless of what you'd like, gassing about "it's popular" doesn't magically equalize any bent "opinion" anybody has. As with everything else, slavery being bad is not a fact. Whether it's good or bad is about the feelings of the person making the assessment. Slavery is good to anyone who feels positively about it. That's not the sort of thing one can be wrong about.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 13, 2018 15:16:00 GMT
It's a fact that those listed things, much like flourishing are all considered positives by those we consider to be halfway not bent. There are no facts about what is or isn't "bent." You're an objectivist who doesn't want to admit as much or who is in denial about it. Thinking that what would count as "bent" has anything to do with facts evidences this.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 13, 2018 15:29:45 GMT
1) I don't care what you think is "fruitful" or not, of course. 2) The reply was specifically to your reply again nattering on "subjective", when all judgement is subjective, yapping about objective weights which don't exist, and silly gassing like nothing "really" counts as progress. 3) In fact we can and do attach the notion of progress to evolution in a positive direction. 4) It's a fact that those listed things, much like flourishing are all considered positives by those we consider to be halfway not bent. 5) Regardless of what you'd like, gassing about "it's popular" doesn't magically equalize any bent "opinion" anybody has. There are no facts about what is or isn't "bent." You're an objectivist who doesn't want to admit as much or who is in denial about it. Thinking that what would count as "bent" has anything to do with facts evidences this. That line is in fact a fact. I'm not an obtuse gasbag and can recognize wide swaths of ideas held and not get confused about the "fact"ness of what it is they hold. Nor am I concerned about your many comically misapplied fieldings of what you've read. You're a bottom feeder who wants his many predatory ideas to be considered "just like any other", and thinks he can prattle it away with "subjective", and "popular". I have no problem with somebody having sex with a four-year-old as long as the four-year-old can and does consent per the criteria I gave for consent above.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 13, 2018 15:42:53 GMT
There are no facts about what is or isn't "bent." You're an objectivist who doesn't want to admit as much or who is in denial about it. Thinking that what would count as "bent" has anything to do with facts evidences this. That line is in fact a fact. I have no problem with somebody having sex with a four-year-old as long as the four-year-old can and does consent per the criteria I gave for consent above.No, it isn't. There are no facts about what counts as "bent."
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 13, 2018 15:49:19 GMT
tpfkar That line is in fact a fact. I'm not an obtuse gasbag and can recognize wide swaths of ideas held and not get confused about the "fact"ness of what it is they hold. Nor am I concerned about your many comically misapplied fieldings of what you've read. You're a bottom feeder who wants his many predatory ideas to be considered "just like any other", and thinks he can prattle it away with "subjective", and "popular". I have no problem with somebody having sex with a four-year-old as long as the four-year-old can and does consent per the criteria I gave for consent above.No, it isn't. There are no facts about what counts as "bent." Yes it is. There are facts about the proportions that hold them. Learn to read. If somebody has sex with a person who's passed out, without consent beforehand, but doesn't cause any injuries (suppose the victim doesn't even realize what's happened until being informed afterwards, say because somebody took a video of the incident), what do you think the appropriate punishment would be? Probably not more than, say, 40 hours of community service. (And by the way, I'd make community service basically be free labor on public works projects.)
|
|