|
Serious topic.
Made me very angry at the people/professionals (aka 'butchers') who perform FGM. I wish I could sew your penises to your faces.
And fuck NSA for reading this message.
|
On July 28 2013 06:41 Shival wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 06:39 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:34 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:27 ZenithM wrote:You misunderstood my post. My question was "what can WE do?, rather than "WHAT can we do?". It's not our country, we don't have any control on legislation and education. So it is actually harder to grasp than you seem to think. In fact, I'll quote Mothra's informative link: There is nothing more difficult than persuading people to give up long-held cultural practices, especially those bound up in taboo subjects like sex. Fine, let me rephrase. Put external pressure on said government to provide legislation and education on the subject. Though, I don't really get your point, as you're constantly trying to say we should do nothing, simply because it's so damn hard to do anything. Guess we shouldn't have gone to the moon then... Lol, I never said that actually, re-read my posts if you want. My point is basically this one: On July 28 2013 02:42 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 02:42 docvoc wrote:On July 28 2013 02:23 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 00:25 KwarK wrote:On July 27 2013 23:52 xM(Z wrote:On July 27 2013 23:35 Shiori wrote:On July 27 2013 23:30 xM(Z wrote:On July 27 2013 23:20 Djzapz wrote:
[quote]
So what are you suggesting? My indoctrination wherein cutting little girls is unacceptable is equivalent to a different indoctrination where cutting little girls is just fine? it's not about right or wrong (fine or not fine), it's about who wins. if they win, your (grand)kids would end up believing that cutting little girls is acceptable. OK, so? What exactly are you trying to argue? that winners don't need justification and that playing the vigilante card, is just disguised hypocrisy. On July 27 2013 23:34 Djzapz wrote:On July 27 2013 23:30 xM(Z wrote:
it's not about right or wrong (fine or not fine), it's about who wins.
if they win, your (grand)kids would end up believing that cutting little girls is acceptable. That seems off topic, nobody's talking about going to war. Advocacy is not to be dismissed... I guess you can "win" with pressure but yeah... Not sure what your angle is. ideological wars are the bloodiest and this is what we are doing here. mine is right, yours is wrong so let's see who wins. Your argument is morally bankrupt, you are advocating the abdication of rational judgement, the thing that makes us better than animals, in favour of ideological passivity. You can bitch all you like about how it's all subjective and the winner decides what is normal and good but it's not true, maybe not everything I believe is right and true and good but I'm damn sure that my belief that you shouldn't cut off the clitoris of girls and sew their vaginas shut isn't one of them. Sure enough to impose my beliefs on others who disagree. People disagree all the time but that doesn't mean that there aren't right answers, it just means some people are dumb. What's worse than the dumb people though are people like you who have so little conviction that they'd rather see evil go on in front of them than take a stance, at least the dumb people don't know they're dumb, you claim to look at all the evidence and yet can't come to a conclusion. Assuming that every human being can use "Rational judgement" to come up with the same conclusion is flawed anyway. In those countries, they're not using the same premises as you so they won't get to the same conclusion (that "FGM is bad"). For example, over there religious dogma is much more powerful than in western countries and can be the basis for a "reasoned" argument ("God wants A, hence B" is perfectly fine), which is kind of inconceivable for you. So I agree with xMZ that in the end it comes down to a power struggle between cultures. If you want your "right thing" to prevail, fight and impose it on others. And btw, there isn't really anything to discuss or debate in this thread, I'm sure nobody here actually support the practice :D. Good OP nonetheless, informative at least. The fact here is that there is no real "actual right." This is all based on perception. Zenith, you are very right to point out cultural differences, I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but I have to quote your comment because of how on point it is. The U.N. exists in a Western way, whereas these countries don't. The differences because of this make us think the action is barbaric, which isn't the case for a lot of the people taking part in it. The process is slowly dying, for various reasons, and while I don't agree with it, we as westerners have no place telling other people that what they are doing is "objectively bad" even if we find the process detestable. True. And yet it must not prevent us from intervening if we think it's not right. It just won't be for the sake of doing the "objective right thing", that would be naive to think that way :D So, then you're a proponent of cultural imperialism? Instead of believing in moral realism? Either way, you're saying you think it should not hold us back to intervene. What then is your suggestion WE should do to intervene?
Well, I don't know, haha (remember, "what now?" :D) but at least I'm aware of it. I just think that a lot of posters here don't know either.
I posted here because I just didn't like when someone talked about science, reason and objectivity when this issue is really about culture, morality and ethics. Maybe I'm just arguing semantics here.
Edit: I didn't read about the metaethics thread nor am I knowledgeable about those so I won't understand the big words, sorry ;D
|
On July 28 2013 06:31 Reason wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 06:25 xM(Z wrote:On July 28 2013 06:10 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:04 xM(Z wrote:On July 28 2013 05:41 ZenithM wrote:
Assuming that "this is objectively wrong", what now?
you go and kill them, softly; until they say - yes sir, you are right. Or you bury them under books until they say: "We're educated now, sir, and you are right." ... and those would be your books right?.  i'd give to that a 50/50 chance at best. also, what if you don't have time to wait until they make up their minds? ps: i'm with DeepElemBlues on the whole consent thing. i mean i understand it as he does. DeepElemBlues is completely right in what he's said about consent but he misinterpreted what Kwark was saying, a simple mistake.
I misread one word and feel dumb about it now 
Shival
So, then you're a proponent of cultural imperialism? Instead of believing in moral realism?
Either way, you're saying you think it should not hold us back to intervene. What then is your suggestion WE should do to intervene?
Moral realism was hamstrung by World War II, it's not dead by any means but calling its opposite "cultural imperialism" seems a bit much.
I personally would want intervention through diplomatic pressure and economic sanction, starting a war over such things, no matter how awful FGM is, would be like blowing up your house to fix a sinkhole in the basement.
|
Type 1: Partial or total removal of the clitoris and/or the prepuce. In medical literature this form of FGM/C is also referred to as ‘clitoridectomy’. A number of practising communities also refer to it as sunna, which is Arabic for ‘tradition’ or ‘duty’.
What the fuck. That's just sick
|
On July 28 2013 05:52 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 05:49 Roe wrote:On July 28 2013 05:43 DeepElemBlues wrote:On July 28 2013 03:59 KwarK wrote:On July 28 2013 02:56 docvoc wrote:On July 28 2013 02:50 Mothra wrote:On July 28 2013 02:42 docvoc wrote:On July 28 2013 02:23 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 00:25 KwarK wrote:On July 27 2013 23:52 xM(Z wrote:
[quote]
that winners don't need justification and that playing the vigilante card, is just disguised hypocrisy.
[quote]
ideological wars are the bloodiest and this is what we are doing here.
mine is right, yours is wrong so let's see who wins. Your argument is morally bankrupt, you are advocating the abdication of rational judgement, the thing that makes us better than animals, in favour of ideological passivity. You can bitch all you like about how it's all subjective and the winner decides what is normal and good but it's not true, maybe not everything I believe is right and true and good but I'm damn sure that my belief that you shouldn't cut off the clitoris of girls and sew their vaginas shut isn't one of them. Sure enough to impose my beliefs on others who disagree. People disagree all the time but that doesn't mean that there aren't right answers, it just means some people are dumb. What's worse than the dumb people though are people like you who have so little conviction that they'd rather see evil go on in front of them than take a stance, at least the dumb people don't know they're dumb, you claim to look at all the evidence and yet can't come to a conclusion. Assuming that every human being can use "Rational judgement" to come up with the same conclusion is flawed anyway. In those countries, they're not using the same premises as you so they won't get to the same conclusion (that "FGM is bad"). For example, over there religious dogma is much more powerful than in western countries and can be the basis for a "reasoned" argument ("God wants A, hence B" is perfectly fine), which is kind of inconceivable for you. So I agree with xMZ that in the end it comes down to a power struggle between cultures. If you want your "right thing" to prevail, fight and impose it on others. And btw, there isn't really anything to discuss or debate in this thread, I'm sure nobody here actually support the practice :D. Good OP nonetheless, informative at least. The fact here is that there is no real "actual right." This is all based on perception. Zenith, you are very right to point out cultural differences, I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but I have to quote your comment because of how on point it is. The U.N. exists in a Western way, whereas these countries don't. The differences because of this make us think the action is barbaric, which isn't the case for a lot of the people taking part in it. The process is slowly dying, for various reasons, and while I don't agree with it, we as westerners have no place telling other people that what they are doing is "objectively bad" even if we find the process detestable. So there is nothing objectively wrong with rape or murder either? The only bad thing about them is the possibility of getting caught? Let's throw out the worst things people can do to each other and say they are vaguely related to the topic at hand! No. There is a difference between a ritual that is accepted by a group of people as necessary for a women, one that the women in the area consent to (barring any of the bullshit "brainwashing" talk that people seem to think is any different than the cultures they live in) and someone raping a women, something she doesn't consent to at all. People consent to scarration all the time, or to labia/clitoris rings or piercings in western society, but I'm guessing that's all fine and dandy because it isn't called mutilation is it Mothra. There are women who argue to this day that marital rape is acceptable and that a women's body belongs to her husband and if the husband wants to have sex with her then he has the right to, even if she does not consent to it. That doesn't make it less rape. You're using consent wrong. That's not marital rape. Not wanting to but doing it anyway without compulsion is giving consent. It may be stupid and wrong in your eyes but it is not withholding consent. Not wanting to and your husband threatens you for not doing your wifely duties (or whatever) or physically overpowers you would be no consent and thus rape. "I don't want to but I'll do it anyway" is consent. "I don't want to and I won't" and then being compelled to through threats or violence is not consent. You're using consent wrong. If you don't want to do it, you're not giving consent. How is that hard to mix up? If you don't want to do it and do it anyway with no one but you making the decision, how are you not giving consent? How is that hard to mix up? Consent is a personal issue. No consent takes two to tango. If my girlfriend asks me to go to the store to pick up tampons and I don't want to but I decide to do it anyway because she's my girlfriend and I feel an obligation to do what she asks, am I going to buy tampons without my consent? How exactly was I forced to do that when no one but me was making the decision?
Kwark said:
that a women's body belongs to her husband and if the husband wants to have sex with her then he has the right to, even if she does not consent to it.
He didn't say that the woman did want to; he said that she didn't "consent" to having sex. He also said that the woman's body belongs to her husband. Seriously, how did you take this to mean that he was talking about instances of free choice + doing something inconvenient to please another person as opposed to what he literally said?
|
On July 28 2013 06:49 ZenithM wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 06:41 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:39 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:34 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:27 ZenithM wrote:You misunderstood my post. My question was "what can WE do?, rather than "WHAT can we do?". It's not our country, we don't have any control on legislation and education. So it is actually harder to grasp than you seem to think. In fact, I'll quote Mothra's informative link: There is nothing more difficult than persuading people to give up long-held cultural practices, especially those bound up in taboo subjects like sex. Fine, let me rephrase. Put external pressure on said government to provide legislation and education on the subject. Though, I don't really get your point, as you're constantly trying to say we should do nothing, simply because it's so damn hard to do anything. Guess we shouldn't have gone to the moon then... Lol, I never said that actually, re-read my posts if you want. My point is basically this one: On July 28 2013 02:42 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 02:42 docvoc wrote:On July 28 2013 02:23 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 00:25 KwarK wrote:On July 27 2013 23:52 xM(Z wrote:On July 27 2013 23:35 Shiori wrote:On July 27 2013 23:30 xM(Z wrote:
[quote]
it's not about right or wrong (fine or not fine), it's about who wins.
if they win, your (grand)kids would end up believing that cutting little girls is acceptable. OK, so? What exactly are you trying to argue? that winners don't need justification and that playing the vigilante card, is just disguised hypocrisy. On July 27 2013 23:34 Djzapz wrote:On July 27 2013 23:30 xM(Z wrote:
it's not about right or wrong (fine or not fine), it's about who wins.
if they win, your (grand)kids would end up believing that cutting little girls is acceptable. That seems off topic, nobody's talking about going to war. Advocacy is not to be dismissed... I guess you can "win" with pressure but yeah... Not sure what your angle is. ideological wars are the bloodiest and this is what we are doing here. mine is right, yours is wrong so let's see who wins. Your argument is morally bankrupt, you are advocating the abdication of rational judgement, the thing that makes us better than animals, in favour of ideological passivity. You can bitch all you like about how it's all subjective and the winner decides what is normal and good but it's not true, maybe not everything I believe is right and true and good but I'm damn sure that my belief that you shouldn't cut off the clitoris of girls and sew their vaginas shut isn't one of them. Sure enough to impose my beliefs on others who disagree. People disagree all the time but that doesn't mean that there aren't right answers, it just means some people are dumb. What's worse than the dumb people though are people like you who have so little conviction that they'd rather see evil go on in front of them than take a stance, at least the dumb people don't know they're dumb, you claim to look at all the evidence and yet can't come to a conclusion. Assuming that every human being can use "Rational judgement" to come up with the same conclusion is flawed anyway. In those countries, they're not using the same premises as you so they won't get to the same conclusion (that "FGM is bad"). For example, over there religious dogma is much more powerful than in western countries and can be the basis for a "reasoned" argument ("God wants A, hence B" is perfectly fine), which is kind of inconceivable for you. So I agree with xMZ that in the end it comes down to a power struggle between cultures. If you want your "right thing" to prevail, fight and impose it on others. And btw, there isn't really anything to discuss or debate in this thread, I'm sure nobody here actually support the practice :D. Good OP nonetheless, informative at least. The fact here is that there is no real "actual right." This is all based on perception. Zenith, you are very right to point out cultural differences, I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but I have to quote your comment because of how on point it is. The U.N. exists in a Western way, whereas these countries don't. The differences because of this make us think the action is barbaric, which isn't the case for a lot of the people taking part in it. The process is slowly dying, for various reasons, and while I don't agree with it, we as westerners have no place telling other people that what they are doing is "objectively bad" even if we find the process detestable. True. And yet it must not prevent us from intervening if we think it's not right. It just won't be for the sake of doing the "objective right thing", that would be naive to think that way :D So, then you're a proponent of cultural imperialism? Instead of believing in moral realism? Either way, you're saying you think it should not hold us back to intervene. What then is your suggestion WE should do to intervene? Well, I don't know, haha (remember, "what now?" :D) but at least I'm aware of it. I just think that a lot of posters here don't know either. I posted here because I just didn't like when someone talked about science, reason and objectivity when this issue is really about culture, morality and ethics. Maybe I'm just arguing semantics here but I don't even think the sentence "This is objectively right/wrong" makes sense.
That was me, among others maybe. This issue is about anything but culture. Culture has no say in matters when innocent lifes are being squashed. Science however shows that FGM is useless, and has harrowing effects on the women involved. That makes it objectively wrong.
|
On July 28 2013 06:52 DeepElemBlues wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 06:31 Reason wrote:On July 28 2013 06:25 xM(Z wrote:On July 28 2013 06:10 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:04 xM(Z wrote:On July 28 2013 05:41 ZenithM wrote:
Assuming that "this is objectively wrong", what now?
you go and kill them, softly; until they say - yes sir, you are right. Or you bury them under books until they say: "We're educated now, sir, and you are right." ... and those would be your books right?. i'd give to that a 50/50 chance at best. also, what if you don't have time to wait until they make up their minds? ps: i'm with DeepElemBlues on the whole consent thing. i mean i understand it as he does. DeepElemBlues is completely right in what he's said about consent but he misinterpreted what Kwark was saying, a simple mistake. I misread one word and feel dumb about it now Show nested quote +Shival
So, then you're a proponent of cultural imperialism? Instead of believing in moral realism?
Either way, you're saying you think it should not hold us back to intervene. What then is your suggestion WE should do to intervene? Moral realism was hamstrung by World War II, it's not dead by any means but calling its opposite "cultural imperialism" seems a bit much. I personally would want intervention through diplomatic pressure and economic sanction, starting a war over such things, no matter how awful FGM is, would be like blowing up your house to fix a sinkhole in the basement.
I don't want to make you feel dumb again, but... I didn't mean to say cultural imperialism is its opposite. What I meant to say is that ZenithM proposes that we should not hold back to intervene, however he doesn't seem to believe in moral realism. Thus that makes him a proponent for cultural imperialism (forcing your belief onto a population simply because you have the means).
|
On July 28 2013 06:57 Shival wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 06:49 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:41 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:39 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:34 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:27 ZenithM wrote:You misunderstood my post. My question was "what can WE do?, rather than "WHAT can we do?". It's not our country, we don't have any control on legislation and education. So it is actually harder to grasp than you seem to think. In fact, I'll quote Mothra's informative link: There is nothing more difficult than persuading people to give up long-held cultural practices, especially those bound up in taboo subjects like sex. Fine, let me rephrase. Put external pressure on said government to provide legislation and education on the subject. Though, I don't really get your point, as you're constantly trying to say we should do nothing, simply because it's so damn hard to do anything. Guess we shouldn't have gone to the moon then... Lol, I never said that actually, re-read my posts if you want. My point is basically this one: On July 28 2013 02:42 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 02:42 docvoc wrote:On July 28 2013 02:23 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 00:25 KwarK wrote:On July 27 2013 23:52 xM(Z wrote:On July 27 2013 23:35 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
OK, so? What exactly are you trying to argue? that winners don't need justification and that playing the vigilante card, is just disguised hypocrisy. On July 27 2013 23:34 Djzapz wrote:
[quote]
That seems off topic, nobody's talking about going to war. Advocacy is not to be dismissed... I guess you can "win" with pressure but yeah... Not sure what your angle is. ideological wars are the bloodiest and this is what we are doing here. mine is right, yours is wrong so let's see who wins. Your argument is morally bankrupt, you are advocating the abdication of rational judgement, the thing that makes us better than animals, in favour of ideological passivity. You can bitch all you like about how it's all subjective and the winner decides what is normal and good but it's not true, maybe not everything I believe is right and true and good but I'm damn sure that my belief that you shouldn't cut off the clitoris of girls and sew their vaginas shut isn't one of them. Sure enough to impose my beliefs on others who disagree. People disagree all the time but that doesn't mean that there aren't right answers, it just means some people are dumb. What's worse than the dumb people though are people like you who have so little conviction that they'd rather see evil go on in front of them than take a stance, at least the dumb people don't know they're dumb, you claim to look at all the evidence and yet can't come to a conclusion. Assuming that every human being can use "Rational judgement" to come up with the same conclusion is flawed anyway. In those countries, they're not using the same premises as you so they won't get to the same conclusion (that "FGM is bad"). For example, over there religious dogma is much more powerful than in western countries and can be the basis for a "reasoned" argument ("God wants A, hence B" is perfectly fine), which is kind of inconceivable for you. So I agree with xMZ that in the end it comes down to a power struggle between cultures. If you want your "right thing" to prevail, fight and impose it on others. And btw, there isn't really anything to discuss or debate in this thread, I'm sure nobody here actually support the practice :D. Good OP nonetheless, informative at least. The fact here is that there is no real "actual right." This is all based on perception. Zenith, you are very right to point out cultural differences, I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but I have to quote your comment because of how on point it is. The U.N. exists in a Western way, whereas these countries don't. The differences because of this make us think the action is barbaric, which isn't the case for a lot of the people taking part in it. The process is slowly dying, for various reasons, and while I don't agree with it, we as westerners have no place telling other people that what they are doing is "objectively bad" even if we find the process detestable. True. And yet it must not prevent us from intervening if we think it's not right. It just won't be for the sake of doing the "objective right thing", that would be naive to think that way :D So, then you're a proponent of cultural imperialism? Instead of believing in moral realism? Either way, you're saying you think it should not hold us back to intervene. What then is your suggestion WE should do to intervene? Well, I don't know, haha (remember, "what now?" :D) but at least I'm aware of it. I just think that a lot of posters here don't know either. I posted here because I just didn't like when someone talked about science, reason and objectivity when this issue is really about culture, morality and ethics. Maybe I'm just arguing semantics here but I don't even think the sentence "This is objectively right/wrong" makes sense. That was me, among others maybe. This issue is about anything but culture. Culture has no say in matters when innocent lifes are being squashed. Science however shows that FGM is useless, and has harrowing effects on the women involved. That makes it objectively wrong.
It makes it subjectively wrong from any rational perspective, but nothing is objectively wrong. Right and wrong are subjective value judgements, it's not right or wrong when a star goes supernova, it's not right or wrong when water evaporates, it simply is.
It's not objectively wrong to murder innocent people in cold blood but every rational person holds the strong subjective belief that it is, so it's safe to say that it's "wrong". Maybe he was just arguing semantics, as he acknowledged, but saying something is "objectively wrong" doesn't actually make sense at all.
|
On July 28 2013 06:04 xM(Z wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 05:41 ZenithM wrote:
Assuming that "this is objectively wrong", what now?
you go and kill them, softly; until they say - yes sir, you are right.
Well, you stop them from doing it ofc, and you jail does who continiue it.
Your religious belief. your tradition... These are things that hold no relevance to reality. Religion specifically have always been designed to control people in some way. They are effective mass-brainwashing tools, nothing more.
Forced circumcision is evil, and must be stopped, for the simple reason, that it's a permanent mutilation of your body, that adults force upon children.
Even if it's simply 1 in 10, or 1 in 1000 that do not want this, then it's worth banishing.
|
On July 28 2013 07:02 Reason wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 06:57 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:49 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:41 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:39 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:34 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:27 ZenithM wrote:You misunderstood my post. My question was "what can WE do?, rather than "WHAT can we do?". It's not our country, we don't have any control on legislation and education. So it is actually harder to grasp than you seem to think. In fact, I'll quote Mothra's informative link: There is nothing more difficult than persuading people to give up long-held cultural practices, especially those bound up in taboo subjects like sex. Fine, let me rephrase. Put external pressure on said government to provide legislation and education on the subject. Though, I don't really get your point, as you're constantly trying to say we should do nothing, simply because it's so damn hard to do anything. Guess we shouldn't have gone to the moon then... Lol, I never said that actually, re-read my posts if you want. My point is basically this one: On July 28 2013 02:42 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 02:42 docvoc wrote:On July 28 2013 02:23 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 00:25 KwarK wrote:On July 27 2013 23:52 xM(Z wrote:
[quote]
that winners don't need justification and that playing the vigilante card, is just disguised hypocrisy.
[quote]
ideological wars are the bloodiest and this is what we are doing here.
mine is right, yours is wrong so let's see who wins. Your argument is morally bankrupt, you are advocating the abdication of rational judgement, the thing that makes us better than animals, in favour of ideological passivity. You can bitch all you like about how it's all subjective and the winner decides what is normal and good but it's not true, maybe not everything I believe is right and true and good but I'm damn sure that my belief that you shouldn't cut off the clitoris of girls and sew their vaginas shut isn't one of them. Sure enough to impose my beliefs on others who disagree. People disagree all the time but that doesn't mean that there aren't right answers, it just means some people are dumb. What's worse than the dumb people though are people like you who have so little conviction that they'd rather see evil go on in front of them than take a stance, at least the dumb people don't know they're dumb, you claim to look at all the evidence and yet can't come to a conclusion. Assuming that every human being can use "Rational judgement" to come up with the same conclusion is flawed anyway. In those countries, they're not using the same premises as you so they won't get to the same conclusion (that "FGM is bad"). For example, over there religious dogma is much more powerful than in western countries and can be the basis for a "reasoned" argument ("God wants A, hence B" is perfectly fine), which is kind of inconceivable for you. So I agree with xMZ that in the end it comes down to a power struggle between cultures. If you want your "right thing" to prevail, fight and impose it on others. And btw, there isn't really anything to discuss or debate in this thread, I'm sure nobody here actually support the practice :D. Good OP nonetheless, informative at least. The fact here is that there is no real "actual right." This is all based on perception. Zenith, you are very right to point out cultural differences, I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but I have to quote your comment because of how on point it is. The U.N. exists in a Western way, whereas these countries don't. The differences because of this make us think the action is barbaric, which isn't the case for a lot of the people taking part in it. The process is slowly dying, for various reasons, and while I don't agree with it, we as westerners have no place telling other people that what they are doing is "objectively bad" even if we find the process detestable. True. And yet it must not prevent us from intervening if we think it's not right. It just won't be for the sake of doing the "objective right thing", that would be naive to think that way :D So, then you're a proponent of cultural imperialism? Instead of believing in moral realism? Either way, you're saying you think it should not hold us back to intervene. What then is your suggestion WE should do to intervene? Well, I don't know, haha (remember, "what now?" :D) but at least I'm aware of it. I just think that a lot of posters here don't know either. I posted here because I just didn't like when someone talked about science, reason and objectivity when this issue is really about culture, morality and ethics. Maybe I'm just arguing semantics here but I don't even think the sentence "This is objectively right/wrong" makes sense. That was me, among others maybe. This issue is about anything but culture. Culture has no say in matters when innocent lifes are being squashed. Science however shows that FGM is useless, and has harrowing effects on the women involved. That makes it objectively wrong. It makes it subjectively wrong from any rational perspective, but nothing is objectively wrong. Right and wrong are subjective value judgements, it's not right or wrong when a star goes supernova, it's not right or wrong when water evaporates, it simply is. It's not objectively wrong to murder people, but every rational person holds the strong subjective belief that it's wrong so it's safe to say "murder is wrong". Maybe he was just arguing semantics, as he acknowledged, but saying something is "objectively wrong" doesn't actually make sense at all.
1+1=7 is not objectively wrong?
|
On July 28 2013 07:03 Shival wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 07:02 Reason wrote:On July 28 2013 06:57 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:49 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:41 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:39 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:34 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:27 ZenithM wrote:You misunderstood my post. My question was "what can WE do?, rather than "WHAT can we do?". It's not our country, we don't have any control on legislation and education. So it is actually harder to grasp than you seem to think. In fact, I'll quote Mothra's informative link: There is nothing more difficult than persuading people to give up long-held cultural practices, especially those bound up in taboo subjects like sex. Fine, let me rephrase. Put external pressure on said government to provide legislation and education on the subject. Though, I don't really get your point, as you're constantly trying to say we should do nothing, simply because it's so damn hard to do anything. Guess we shouldn't have gone to the moon then... Lol, I never said that actually, re-read my posts if you want. My point is basically this one: On July 28 2013 02:42 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 02:42 docvoc wrote:On July 28 2013 02:23 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 00:25 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
Your argument is morally bankrupt, you are advocating the abdication of rational judgement, the thing that makes us better than animals, in favour of ideological passivity. You can bitch all you like about how it's all subjective and the winner decides what is normal and good but it's not true, maybe not everything I believe is right and true and good but I'm damn sure that my belief that you shouldn't cut off the clitoris of girls and sew their vaginas shut isn't one of them. Sure enough to impose my beliefs on others who disagree. People disagree all the time but that doesn't mean that there aren't right answers, it just means some people are dumb. What's worse than the dumb people though are people like you who have so little conviction that they'd rather see evil go on in front of them than take a stance, at least the dumb people don't know they're dumb, you claim to look at all the evidence and yet can't come to a conclusion. Assuming that every human being can use "Rational judgement" to come up with the same conclusion is flawed anyway. In those countries, they're not using the same premises as you so they won't get to the same conclusion (that "FGM is bad"). For example, over there religious dogma is much more powerful than in western countries and can be the basis for a "reasoned" argument ("God wants A, hence B" is perfectly fine), which is kind of inconceivable for you. So I agree with xMZ that in the end it comes down to a power struggle between cultures. If you want your "right thing" to prevail, fight and impose it on others. And btw, there isn't really anything to discuss or debate in this thread, I'm sure nobody here actually support the practice :D. Good OP nonetheless, informative at least. The fact here is that there is no real "actual right." This is all based on perception. Zenith, you are very right to point out cultural differences, I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but I have to quote your comment because of how on point it is. The U.N. exists in a Western way, whereas these countries don't. The differences because of this make us think the action is barbaric, which isn't the case for a lot of the people taking part in it. The process is slowly dying, for various reasons, and while I don't agree with it, we as westerners have no place telling other people that what they are doing is "objectively bad" even if we find the process detestable. True. And yet it must not prevent us from intervening if we think it's not right. It just won't be for the sake of doing the "objective right thing", that would be naive to think that way :D So, then you're a proponent of cultural imperialism? Instead of believing in moral realism? Either way, you're saying you think it should not hold us back to intervene. What then is your suggestion WE should do to intervene? Well, I don't know, haha (remember, "what now?" :D) but at least I'm aware of it. I just think that a lot of posters here don't know either. I posted here because I just didn't like when someone talked about science, reason and objectivity when this issue is really about culture, morality and ethics. Maybe I'm just arguing semantics here but I don't even think the sentence "This is objectively right/wrong" makes sense. That was me, among others maybe. This issue is about anything but culture. Culture has no say in matters when innocent lifes are being squashed. Science however shows that FGM is useless, and has harrowing effects on the women involved. That makes it objectively wrong. It makes it subjectively wrong from any rational perspective, but nothing is objectively wrong. Right and wrong are subjective value judgements, it's not right or wrong when a star goes supernova, it's not right or wrong when water evaporates, it simply is. It's not objectively wrong to murder people, but every rational person holds the strong subjective belief that it's wrong so it's safe to say "murder is wrong". Maybe he was just arguing semantics, as he acknowledged, but saying something is "objectively wrong" doesn't actually make sense at all. 1+1=7 is not objectively wrong?
That's not a subjective value judgement, that's a mathematical fallacy. 1+1=7 is objectively wrong, of course. I was referring to "right and wrong" as in "good and evil" not "correct or incorrect". Sorry If I didn't make that clear, I can understand why the statement "nothing is objectively wrong" would be misleading.
|
On July 28 2013 07:03 Shival wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 07:02 Reason wrote:On July 28 2013 06:57 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:49 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:41 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:39 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:34 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:27 ZenithM wrote:You misunderstood my post. My question was "what can WE do?, rather than "WHAT can we do?". It's not our country, we don't have any control on legislation and education. So it is actually harder to grasp than you seem to think. In fact, I'll quote Mothra's informative link: There is nothing more difficult than persuading people to give up long-held cultural practices, especially those bound up in taboo subjects like sex. Fine, let me rephrase. Put external pressure on said government to provide legislation and education on the subject. Though, I don't really get your point, as you're constantly trying to say we should do nothing, simply because it's so damn hard to do anything. Guess we shouldn't have gone to the moon then... Lol, I never said that actually, re-read my posts if you want. My point is basically this one: On July 28 2013 02:42 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 02:42 docvoc wrote:On July 28 2013 02:23 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 00:25 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
Your argument is morally bankrupt, you are advocating the abdication of rational judgement, the thing that makes us better than animals, in favour of ideological passivity. You can bitch all you like about how it's all subjective and the winner decides what is normal and good but it's not true, maybe not everything I believe is right and true and good but I'm damn sure that my belief that you shouldn't cut off the clitoris of girls and sew their vaginas shut isn't one of them. Sure enough to impose my beliefs on others who disagree. People disagree all the time but that doesn't mean that there aren't right answers, it just means some people are dumb. What's worse than the dumb people though are people like you who have so little conviction that they'd rather see evil go on in front of them than take a stance, at least the dumb people don't know they're dumb, you claim to look at all the evidence and yet can't come to a conclusion. Assuming that every human being can use "Rational judgement" to come up with the same conclusion is flawed anyway. In those countries, they're not using the same premises as you so they won't get to the same conclusion (that "FGM is bad"). For example, over there religious dogma is much more powerful than in western countries and can be the basis for a "reasoned" argument ("God wants A, hence B" is perfectly fine), which is kind of inconceivable for you. So I agree with xMZ that in the end it comes down to a power struggle between cultures. If you want your "right thing" to prevail, fight and impose it on others. And btw, there isn't really anything to discuss or debate in this thread, I'm sure nobody here actually support the practice :D. Good OP nonetheless, informative at least. The fact here is that there is no real "actual right." This is all based on perception. Zenith, you are very right to point out cultural differences, I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but I have to quote your comment because of how on point it is. The U.N. exists in a Western way, whereas these countries don't. The differences because of this make us think the action is barbaric, which isn't the case for a lot of the people taking part in it. The process is slowly dying, for various reasons, and while I don't agree with it, we as westerners have no place telling other people that what they are doing is "objectively bad" even if we find the process detestable. True. And yet it must not prevent us from intervening if we think it's not right. It just won't be for the sake of doing the "objective right thing", that would be naive to think that way :D So, then you're a proponent of cultural imperialism? Instead of believing in moral realism? Either way, you're saying you think it should not hold us back to intervene. What then is your suggestion WE should do to intervene? Well, I don't know, haha (remember, "what now?" :D) but at least I'm aware of it. I just think that a lot of posters here don't know either. I posted here because I just didn't like when someone talked about science, reason and objectivity when this issue is really about culture, morality and ethics. Maybe I'm just arguing semantics here but I don't even think the sentence "This is objectively right/wrong" makes sense. That was me, among others maybe. This issue is about anything but culture. Culture has no say in matters when innocent lifes are being squashed. Science however shows that FGM is useless, and has harrowing effects on the women involved. That makes it objectively wrong. It makes it subjectively wrong from any rational perspective, but nothing is objectively wrong. Right and wrong are subjective value judgements, it's not right or wrong when a star goes supernova, it's not right or wrong when water evaporates, it simply is. It's not objectively wrong to murder people, but every rational person holds the strong subjective belief that it's wrong so it's safe to say "murder is wrong". Maybe he was just arguing semantics, as he acknowledged, but saying something is "objectively wrong" doesn't actually make sense at all. 1+1=7 is not objectively wrong?
Mixing up your wrongs is wrong.
|
On July 28 2013 06:57 Shival wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 06:49 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:41 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:39 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:34 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:27 ZenithM wrote:You misunderstood my post. My question was "what can WE do?, rather than "WHAT can we do?". It's not our country, we don't have any control on legislation and education. So it is actually harder to grasp than you seem to think. In fact, I'll quote Mothra's informative link: There is nothing more difficult than persuading people to give up long-held cultural practices, especially those bound up in taboo subjects like sex. Fine, let me rephrase. Put external pressure on said government to provide legislation and education on the subject. Though, I don't really get your point, as you're constantly trying to say we should do nothing, simply because it's so damn hard to do anything. Guess we shouldn't have gone to the moon then... Lol, I never said that actually, re-read my posts if you want. My point is basically this one: On July 28 2013 02:42 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 02:42 docvoc wrote:On July 28 2013 02:23 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 00:25 KwarK wrote:On July 27 2013 23:52 xM(Z wrote:On July 27 2013 23:35 Shiori wrote:
[quote]
OK, so? What exactly are you trying to argue? that winners don't need justification and that playing the vigilante card, is just disguised hypocrisy. On July 27 2013 23:34 Djzapz wrote:
[quote]
That seems off topic, nobody's talking about going to war. Advocacy is not to be dismissed... I guess you can "win" with pressure but yeah... Not sure what your angle is. ideological wars are the bloodiest and this is what we are doing here. mine is right, yours is wrong so let's see who wins. Your argument is morally bankrupt, you are advocating the abdication of rational judgement, the thing that makes us better than animals, in favour of ideological passivity. You can bitch all you like about how it's all subjective and the winner decides what is normal and good but it's not true, maybe not everything I believe is right and true and good but I'm damn sure that my belief that you shouldn't cut off the clitoris of girls and sew their vaginas shut isn't one of them. Sure enough to impose my beliefs on others who disagree. People disagree all the time but that doesn't mean that there aren't right answers, it just means some people are dumb. What's worse than the dumb people though are people like you who have so little conviction that they'd rather see evil go on in front of them than take a stance, at least the dumb people don't know they're dumb, you claim to look at all the evidence and yet can't come to a conclusion. Assuming that every human being can use "Rational judgement" to come up with the same conclusion is flawed anyway. In those countries, they're not using the same premises as you so they won't get to the same conclusion (that "FGM is bad"). For example, over there religious dogma is much more powerful than in western countries and can be the basis for a "reasoned" argument ("God wants A, hence B" is perfectly fine), which is kind of inconceivable for you. So I agree with xMZ that in the end it comes down to a power struggle between cultures. If you want your "right thing" to prevail, fight and impose it on others. And btw, there isn't really anything to discuss or debate in this thread, I'm sure nobody here actually support the practice :D. Good OP nonetheless, informative at least. The fact here is that there is no real "actual right." This is all based on perception. Zenith, you are very right to point out cultural differences, I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but I have to quote your comment because of how on point it is. The U.N. exists in a Western way, whereas these countries don't. The differences because of this make us think the action is barbaric, which isn't the case for a lot of the people taking part in it. The process is slowly dying, for various reasons, and while I don't agree with it, we as westerners have no place telling other people that what they are doing is "objectively bad" even if we find the process detestable. True. And yet it must not prevent us from intervening if we think it's not right. It just won't be for the sake of doing the "objective right thing", that would be naive to think that way :D So, then you're a proponent of cultural imperialism? Instead of believing in moral realism? Either way, you're saying you think it should not hold us back to intervene. What then is your suggestion WE should do to intervene? Well, I don't know, haha (remember, "what now?" :D) but at least I'm aware of it. I just think that a lot of posters here don't know either. I posted here because I just didn't like when someone talked about science, reason and objectivity when this issue is really about culture, morality and ethics. Maybe I'm just arguing semantics here but I don't even think the sentence "This is objectively right/wrong" makes sense. That was me, among others maybe. This issue is about anything but culture. Culture has no say in matters when innocent lifes are being squashed. Science however shows that FGM is useless, and has harrowing effects on the women involved. That makes it objectively wrong.
Hmm. Surely you agree that FGM is a cultural thing right?
So it's a cultural issue at least.
And I admit I didn't read every piece of information about FGM, but please point out which science said that FGM is useless. That would probably sound like "we demonstrated that religious prayer is useless", so I'm interested.
|
On July 28 2013 07:02 Reason wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 06:57 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:49 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:41 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:39 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:34 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:27 ZenithM wrote:You misunderstood my post. My question was "what can WE do?, rather than "WHAT can we do?". It's not our country, we don't have any control on legislation and education. So it is actually harder to grasp than you seem to think. In fact, I'll quote Mothra's informative link: There is nothing more difficult than persuading people to give up long-held cultural practices, especially those bound up in taboo subjects like sex. Fine, let me rephrase. Put external pressure on said government to provide legislation and education on the subject. Though, I don't really get your point, as you're constantly trying to say we should do nothing, simply because it's so damn hard to do anything. Guess we shouldn't have gone to the moon then... Lol, I never said that actually, re-read my posts if you want. My point is basically this one: On July 28 2013 02:42 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 02:42 docvoc wrote:On July 28 2013 02:23 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 00:25 KwarK wrote:On July 27 2013 23:52 xM(Z wrote:
[quote]
that winners don't need justification and that playing the vigilante card, is just disguised hypocrisy.
[quote]
ideological wars are the bloodiest and this is what we are doing here.
mine is right, yours is wrong so let's see who wins. Your argument is morally bankrupt, you are advocating the abdication of rational judgement, the thing that makes us better than animals, in favour of ideological passivity. You can bitch all you like about how it's all subjective and the winner decides what is normal and good but it's not true, maybe not everything I believe is right and true and good but I'm damn sure that my belief that you shouldn't cut off the clitoris of girls and sew their vaginas shut isn't one of them. Sure enough to impose my beliefs on others who disagree. People disagree all the time but that doesn't mean that there aren't right answers, it just means some people are dumb. What's worse than the dumb people though are people like you who have so little conviction that they'd rather see evil go on in front of them than take a stance, at least the dumb people don't know they're dumb, you claim to look at all the evidence and yet can't come to a conclusion. Assuming that every human being can use "Rational judgement" to come up with the same conclusion is flawed anyway. In those countries, they're not using the same premises as you so they won't get to the same conclusion (that "FGM is bad"). For example, over there religious dogma is much more powerful than in western countries and can be the basis for a "reasoned" argument ("God wants A, hence B" is perfectly fine), which is kind of inconceivable for you. So I agree with xMZ that in the end it comes down to a power struggle between cultures. If you want your "right thing" to prevail, fight and impose it on others. And btw, there isn't really anything to discuss or debate in this thread, I'm sure nobody here actually support the practice :D. Good OP nonetheless, informative at least. The fact here is that there is no real "actual right." This is all based on perception. Zenith, you are very right to point out cultural differences, I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but I have to quote your comment because of how on point it is. The U.N. exists in a Western way, whereas these countries don't. The differences because of this make us think the action is barbaric, which isn't the case for a lot of the people taking part in it. The process is slowly dying, for various reasons, and while I don't agree with it, we as westerners have no place telling other people that what they are doing is "objectively bad" even if we find the process detestable. True. And yet it must not prevent us from intervening if we think it's not right. It just won't be for the sake of doing the "objective right thing", that would be naive to think that way :D So, then you're a proponent of cultural imperialism? Instead of believing in moral realism? Either way, you're saying you think it should not hold us back to intervene. What then is your suggestion WE should do to intervene? Well, I don't know, haha (remember, "what now?" :D) but at least I'm aware of it. I just think that a lot of posters here don't know either. I posted here because I just didn't like when someone talked about science, reason and objectivity when this issue is really about culture, morality and ethics. Maybe I'm just arguing semantics here but I don't even think the sentence "This is objectively right/wrong" makes sense. That was me, among others maybe. This issue is about anything but culture. Culture has no say in matters when innocent lifes are being squashed. Science however shows that FGM is useless, and has harrowing effects on the women involved. That makes it objectively wrong. It makes it subjectively wrong from any rational perspective, but nothing is objectively wrong. Right and wrong are subjective value judgements, it's not right or wrong when a star goes supernova, it's not right or wrong when water evaporates, it simply is. It's not objectively wrong to murder people, but every rational person holds the strong subjective belief that it's wrong so it's safe to say "murder is wrong". Maybe he was just arguing semantics, as he acknowledged, but saying something is "objectively wrong" doesn't actually make sense at all.
You lost this debate the moment you said that. That is THE most ignorant thing i have heard anyone say since 3rd grade.
I'm guessing you went to school at some point. At exams and tests, did you just give them a paper saying "No answer is right or wrong, it's subjetive!" ?!
Theres other examples, but this one should be fool proof enough to make you understand why you are wrong.
|
On July 28 2013 07:09 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 07:02 Reason wrote:On July 28 2013 06:57 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:49 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:41 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:39 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:34 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:27 ZenithM wrote:You misunderstood my post. My question was "what can WE do?, rather than "WHAT can we do?". It's not our country, we don't have any control on legislation and education. So it is actually harder to grasp than you seem to think. In fact, I'll quote Mothra's informative link: There is nothing more difficult than persuading people to give up long-held cultural practices, especially those bound up in taboo subjects like sex. Fine, let me rephrase. Put external pressure on said government to provide legislation and education on the subject. Though, I don't really get your point, as you're constantly trying to say we should do nothing, simply because it's so damn hard to do anything. Guess we shouldn't have gone to the moon then... Lol, I never said that actually, re-read my posts if you want. My point is basically this one: On July 28 2013 02:42 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 02:42 docvoc wrote:On July 28 2013 02:23 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 00:25 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
Your argument is morally bankrupt, you are advocating the abdication of rational judgement, the thing that makes us better than animals, in favour of ideological passivity. You can bitch all you like about how it's all subjective and the winner decides what is normal and good but it's not true, maybe not everything I believe is right and true and good but I'm damn sure that my belief that you shouldn't cut off the clitoris of girls and sew their vaginas shut isn't one of them. Sure enough to impose my beliefs on others who disagree. People disagree all the time but that doesn't mean that there aren't right answers, it just means some people are dumb. What's worse than the dumb people though are people like you who have so little conviction that they'd rather see evil go on in front of them than take a stance, at least the dumb people don't know they're dumb, you claim to look at all the evidence and yet can't come to a conclusion. Assuming that every human being can use "Rational judgement" to come up with the same conclusion is flawed anyway. In those countries, they're not using the same premises as you so they won't get to the same conclusion (that "FGM is bad"). For example, over there religious dogma is much more powerful than in western countries and can be the basis for a "reasoned" argument ("God wants A, hence B" is perfectly fine), which is kind of inconceivable for you. So I agree with xMZ that in the end it comes down to a power struggle between cultures. If you want your "right thing" to prevail, fight and impose it on others. And btw, there isn't really anything to discuss or debate in this thread, I'm sure nobody here actually support the practice :D. Good OP nonetheless, informative at least. The fact here is that there is no real "actual right." This is all based on perception. Zenith, you are very right to point out cultural differences, I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but I have to quote your comment because of how on point it is. The U.N. exists in a Western way, whereas these countries don't. The differences because of this make us think the action is barbaric, which isn't the case for a lot of the people taking part in it. The process is slowly dying, for various reasons, and while I don't agree with it, we as westerners have no place telling other people that what they are doing is "objectively bad" even if we find the process detestable. True. And yet it must not prevent us from intervening if we think it's not right. It just won't be for the sake of doing the "objective right thing", that would be naive to think that way :D So, then you're a proponent of cultural imperialism? Instead of believing in moral realism? Either way, you're saying you think it should not hold us back to intervene. What then is your suggestion WE should do to intervene? Well, I don't know, haha (remember, "what now?" :D) but at least I'm aware of it. I just think that a lot of posters here don't know either. I posted here because I just didn't like when someone talked about science, reason and objectivity when this issue is really about culture, morality and ethics. Maybe I'm just arguing semantics here but I don't even think the sentence "This is objectively right/wrong" makes sense. That was me, among others maybe. This issue is about anything but culture. Culture has no say in matters when innocent lifes are being squashed. Science however shows that FGM is useless, and has harrowing effects on the women involved. That makes it objectively wrong. It makes it subjectively wrong from any rational perspective, but nothing is objectively wrong. Right and wrong are subjective value judgements, it's not right or wrong when a star goes supernova, it's not right or wrong when water evaporates, it simply is. It's not objectively wrong to murder people, but every rational person holds the strong subjective belief that it's wrong so it's safe to say "murder is wrong". Maybe he was just arguing semantics, as he acknowledged, but saying something is "objectively wrong" doesn't actually make sense at all. You lost this debate the moment you said that. That is THE most ignorant thing i have heard anyone say since 3rd grade. I'm guessing you went to school at some point. At exams and tests, did you just give them a paper saying "No answer is right or wrong, it's subjetive!" ?! Theres other examples, but this one should be fool proof enough to make you understand why you are wrong.
It's not a debate, I was trying to be nice and explain something to a fellow TL member. I've explained what I meant in greater detail in an attempt to avoid further confusion but maybe you didn't see my post?
+ Show Spoiler +On July 28 2013 07:05 Reason wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 07:03 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 07:02 Reason wrote:On July 28 2013 06:57 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:49 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:41 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:39 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:34 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:27 ZenithM wrote:You misunderstood my post. My question was "what can WE do?, rather than "WHAT can we do?". It's not our country, we don't have any control on legislation and education. So it is actually harder to grasp than you seem to think. In fact, I'll quote Mothra's informative link: There is nothing more difficult than persuading people to give up long-held cultural practices, especially those bound up in taboo subjects like sex. Fine, let me rephrase. Put external pressure on said government to provide legislation and education on the subject. Though, I don't really get your point, as you're constantly trying to say we should do nothing, simply because it's so damn hard to do anything. Guess we shouldn't have gone to the moon then... Lol, I never said that actually, re-read my posts if you want. My point is basically this one: On July 28 2013 02:42 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 02:42 docvoc wrote:On July 28 2013 02:23 ZenithM wrote:
[quote]
Assuming that every human being can use "Rational judgement" to come up with the same conclusion is flawed anyway. In those countries, they're not using the same premises as you so they won't get to the same conclusion (that "FGM is bad").
For example, over there religious dogma is much more powerful than in western countries and can be the basis for a "reasoned" argument ("God wants A, hence B" is perfectly fine), which is kind of inconceivable for you.
So I agree with xMZ that in the end it comes down to a power struggle between cultures. If you want your "right thing" to prevail, fight and impose it on others.
And btw, there isn't really anything to discuss or debate in this thread, I'm sure nobody here actually support the practice :D. Good OP nonetheless, informative at least. The fact here is that there is no real "actual right." This is all based on perception. Zenith, you are very right to point out cultural differences, I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but I have to quote your comment because of how on point it is. The U.N. exists in a Western way, whereas these countries don't. The differences because of this make us think the action is barbaric, which isn't the case for a lot of the people taking part in it. The process is slowly dying, for various reasons, and while I don't agree with it, we as westerners have no place telling other people that what they are doing is "objectively bad" even if we find the process detestable. True. And yet it must not prevent us from intervening if we think it's not right. It just won't be for the sake of doing the "objective right thing", that would be naive to think that way :D So, then you're a proponent of cultural imperialism? Instead of believing in moral realism? Either way, you're saying you think it should not hold us back to intervene. What then is your suggestion WE should do to intervene? Well, I don't know, haha (remember, "what now?" :D) but at least I'm aware of it. I just think that a lot of posters here don't know either. I posted here because I just didn't like when someone talked about science, reason and objectivity when this issue is really about culture, morality and ethics. Maybe I'm just arguing semantics here but I don't even think the sentence "This is objectively right/wrong" makes sense. That was me, among others maybe. This issue is about anything but culture. Culture has no say in matters when innocent lifes are being squashed. Science however shows that FGM is useless, and has harrowing effects on the women involved. That makes it objectively wrong. It makes it subjectively wrong from any rational perspective, but nothing is objectively wrong. Right and wrong are subjective value judgements, it's not right or wrong when a star goes supernova, it's not right or wrong when water evaporates, it simply is. It's not objectively wrong to murder people, but every rational person holds the strong subjective belief that it's wrong so it's safe to say "murder is wrong". Maybe he was just arguing semantics, as he acknowledged, but saying something is "objectively wrong" doesn't actually make sense at all. 1+1=7 is not objectively wrong? That's not a subjective value judgement, that's a mathematical fallacy. 1+1=7 is objectively wrong, of course. I was referring to "right and wrong" as in "good and evil" not "correct or incorrect". Sorry If I didn't make that clear, I can understand why the statement "nothing is objectively wrong" would be misleading.
Your posting reeks of ignorance, not mine.
|
On July 28 2013 07:09 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 07:02 Reason wrote:On July 28 2013 06:57 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:49 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:41 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:39 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:34 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:27 ZenithM wrote:You misunderstood my post. My question was "what can WE do?, rather than "WHAT can we do?". It's not our country, we don't have any control on legislation and education. So it is actually harder to grasp than you seem to think. In fact, I'll quote Mothra's informative link: There is nothing more difficult than persuading people to give up long-held cultural practices, especially those bound up in taboo subjects like sex. Fine, let me rephrase. Put external pressure on said government to provide legislation and education on the subject. Though, I don't really get your point, as you're constantly trying to say we should do nothing, simply because it's so damn hard to do anything. Guess we shouldn't have gone to the moon then... Lol, I never said that actually, re-read my posts if you want. My point is basically this one: On July 28 2013 02:42 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 02:42 docvoc wrote:On July 28 2013 02:23 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 00:25 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
Your argument is morally bankrupt, you are advocating the abdication of rational judgement, the thing that makes us better than animals, in favour of ideological passivity. You can bitch all you like about how it's all subjective and the winner decides what is normal and good but it's not true, maybe not everything I believe is right and true and good but I'm damn sure that my belief that you shouldn't cut off the clitoris of girls and sew their vaginas shut isn't one of them. Sure enough to impose my beliefs on others who disagree. People disagree all the time but that doesn't mean that there aren't right answers, it just means some people are dumb. What's worse than the dumb people though are people like you who have so little conviction that they'd rather see evil go on in front of them than take a stance, at least the dumb people don't know they're dumb, you claim to look at all the evidence and yet can't come to a conclusion. Assuming that every human being can use "Rational judgement" to come up with the same conclusion is flawed anyway. In those countries, they're not using the same premises as you so they won't get to the same conclusion (that "FGM is bad"). For example, over there religious dogma is much more powerful than in western countries and can be the basis for a "reasoned" argument ("God wants A, hence B" is perfectly fine), which is kind of inconceivable for you. So I agree with xMZ that in the end it comes down to a power struggle between cultures. If you want your "right thing" to prevail, fight and impose it on others. And btw, there isn't really anything to discuss or debate in this thread, I'm sure nobody here actually support the practice :D. Good OP nonetheless, informative at least. The fact here is that there is no real "actual right." This is all based on perception. Zenith, you are very right to point out cultural differences, I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but I have to quote your comment because of how on point it is. The U.N. exists in a Western way, whereas these countries don't. The differences because of this make us think the action is barbaric, which isn't the case for a lot of the people taking part in it. The process is slowly dying, for various reasons, and while I don't agree with it, we as westerners have no place telling other people that what they are doing is "objectively bad" even if we find the process detestable. True. And yet it must not prevent us from intervening if we think it's not right. It just won't be for the sake of doing the "objective right thing", that would be naive to think that way :D So, then you're a proponent of cultural imperialism? Instead of believing in moral realism? Either way, you're saying you think it should not hold us back to intervene. What then is your suggestion WE should do to intervene? Well, I don't know, haha (remember, "what now?" :D) but at least I'm aware of it. I just think that a lot of posters here don't know either. I posted here because I just didn't like when someone talked about science, reason and objectivity when this issue is really about culture, morality and ethics. Maybe I'm just arguing semantics here but I don't even think the sentence "This is objectively right/wrong" makes sense. That was me, among others maybe. This issue is about anything but culture. Culture has no say in matters when innocent lifes are being squashed. Science however shows that FGM is useless, and has harrowing effects on the women involved. That makes it objectively wrong. It makes it subjectively wrong from any rational perspective, but nothing is objectively wrong. Right and wrong are subjective value judgements, it's not right or wrong when a star goes supernova, it's not right or wrong when water evaporates, it simply is. It's not objectively wrong to murder people, but every rational person holds the strong subjective belief that it's wrong so it's safe to say "murder is wrong". Maybe he was just arguing semantics, as he acknowledged, but saying something is "objectively wrong" doesn't actually make sense at all. You lost this debate the moment you said that. That is THE most ignorant thing i have heard anyone say since 3rd grade. I'm guessing you went to school at some point. At exams and tests, did you just give them a paper saying "No answer is right or wrong, it's subjetive!" ?! Theres other examples, but this one should be fool proof enough to make you understand why you are wrong.
When he uses the word ''wrong'' he is not using it as a synonym to ''incorrect'' but rather as morally wrong. There is a difference, I suggest you learn it,
|
On July 28 2013 07:05 Reason wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 07:03 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 07:02 Reason wrote:On July 28 2013 06:57 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:49 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:41 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:39 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:34 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:27 ZenithM wrote:You misunderstood my post. My question was "what can WE do?, rather than "WHAT can we do?". It's not our country, we don't have any control on legislation and education. So it is actually harder to grasp than you seem to think. In fact, I'll quote Mothra's informative link: There is nothing more difficult than persuading people to give up long-held cultural practices, especially those bound up in taboo subjects like sex. Fine, let me rephrase. Put external pressure on said government to provide legislation and education on the subject. Though, I don't really get your point, as you're constantly trying to say we should do nothing, simply because it's so damn hard to do anything. Guess we shouldn't have gone to the moon then... Lol, I never said that actually, re-read my posts if you want. My point is basically this one: On July 28 2013 02:42 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 02:42 docvoc wrote:On July 28 2013 02:23 ZenithM wrote:
[quote]
Assuming that every human being can use "Rational judgement" to come up with the same conclusion is flawed anyway. In those countries, they're not using the same premises as you so they won't get to the same conclusion (that "FGM is bad").
For example, over there religious dogma is much more powerful than in western countries and can be the basis for a "reasoned" argument ("God wants A, hence B" is perfectly fine), which is kind of inconceivable for you.
So I agree with xMZ that in the end it comes down to a power struggle between cultures. If you want your "right thing" to prevail, fight and impose it on others.
And btw, there isn't really anything to discuss or debate in this thread, I'm sure nobody here actually support the practice :D. Good OP nonetheless, informative at least. The fact here is that there is no real "actual right." This is all based on perception. Zenith, you are very right to point out cultural differences, I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but I have to quote your comment because of how on point it is. The U.N. exists in a Western way, whereas these countries don't. The differences because of this make us think the action is barbaric, which isn't the case for a lot of the people taking part in it. The process is slowly dying, for various reasons, and while I don't agree with it, we as westerners have no place telling other people that what they are doing is "objectively bad" even if we find the process detestable. True. And yet it must not prevent us from intervening if we think it's not right. It just won't be for the sake of doing the "objective right thing", that would be naive to think that way :D So, then you're a proponent of cultural imperialism? Instead of believing in moral realism? Either way, you're saying you think it should not hold us back to intervene. What then is your suggestion WE should do to intervene? Well, I don't know, haha (remember, "what now?" :D) but at least I'm aware of it. I just think that a lot of posters here don't know either. I posted here because I just didn't like when someone talked about science, reason and objectivity when this issue is really about culture, morality and ethics. Maybe I'm just arguing semantics here but I don't even think the sentence "This is objectively right/wrong" makes sense. That was me, among others maybe. This issue is about anything but culture. Culture has no say in matters when innocent lifes are being squashed. Science however shows that FGM is useless, and has harrowing effects on the women involved. That makes it objectively wrong. It makes it subjectively wrong from any rational perspective, but nothing is objectively wrong. Right and wrong are subjective value judgements, it's not right or wrong when a star goes supernova, it's not right or wrong when water evaporates, it simply is. It's not objectively wrong to murder people, but every rational person holds the strong subjective belief that it's wrong so it's safe to say "murder is wrong". Maybe he was just arguing semantics, as he acknowledged, but saying something is "objectively wrong" doesn't actually make sense at all. 1+1=7 is not objectively wrong? That's not a subjective value judgement, that's a mathematical fallacy. 1+1=7 is objectively wrong, of course. I was referring to "right and wrong" as in "good and evil" not "correct or incorrect". Sorry If I didn't make that clear, I can understand why the statement "nothing is objectively wrong" would be misleading.
Why do you have to jugde iin terms of "good" and "evil"?
It's objectively wrong to perform forced FGM, because it:
A: Permanently damagdes the genetilia.
B: Is forced upon children.
C: There are numerous records of it actually killing or heavely crippeling the victims.
D: Theres no benefits to it.
E: It hurts their reproduction rate AND options significantly, which is harmful to our species... I feel like this is basic biologi you learn in like 6th grade, so i will not give examples here.
|
On July 28 2013 07:09 cloneThorN wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 07:02 Reason wrote:On July 28 2013 06:57 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:49 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:41 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:39 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:34 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:27 ZenithM wrote:You misunderstood my post. My question was "what can WE do?, rather than "WHAT can we do?". It's not our country, we don't have any control on legislation and education. So it is actually harder to grasp than you seem to think. In fact, I'll quote Mothra's informative link: There is nothing more difficult than persuading people to give up long-held cultural practices, especially those bound up in taboo subjects like sex. Fine, let me rephrase. Put external pressure on said government to provide legislation and education on the subject. Though, I don't really get your point, as you're constantly trying to say we should do nothing, simply because it's so damn hard to do anything. Guess we shouldn't have gone to the moon then... Lol, I never said that actually, re-read my posts if you want. My point is basically this one: On July 28 2013 02:42 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 02:42 docvoc wrote:On July 28 2013 02:23 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 00:25 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
Your argument is morally bankrupt, you are advocating the abdication of rational judgement, the thing that makes us better than animals, in favour of ideological passivity. You can bitch all you like about how it's all subjective and the winner decides what is normal and good but it's not true, maybe not everything I believe is right and true and good but I'm damn sure that my belief that you shouldn't cut off the clitoris of girls and sew their vaginas shut isn't one of them. Sure enough to impose my beliefs on others who disagree. People disagree all the time but that doesn't mean that there aren't right answers, it just means some people are dumb. What's worse than the dumb people though are people like you who have so little conviction that they'd rather see evil go on in front of them than take a stance, at least the dumb people don't know they're dumb, you claim to look at all the evidence and yet can't come to a conclusion. Assuming that every human being can use "Rational judgement" to come up with the same conclusion is flawed anyway. In those countries, they're not using the same premises as you so they won't get to the same conclusion (that "FGM is bad"). For example, over there religious dogma is much more powerful than in western countries and can be the basis for a "reasoned" argument ("God wants A, hence B" is perfectly fine), which is kind of inconceivable for you. So I agree with xMZ that in the end it comes down to a power struggle between cultures. If you want your "right thing" to prevail, fight and impose it on others. And btw, there isn't really anything to discuss or debate in this thread, I'm sure nobody here actually support the practice :D. Good OP nonetheless, informative at least. The fact here is that there is no real "actual right." This is all based on perception. Zenith, you are very right to point out cultural differences, I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but I have to quote your comment because of how on point it is. The U.N. exists in a Western way, whereas these countries don't. The differences because of this make us think the action is barbaric, which isn't the case for a lot of the people taking part in it. The process is slowly dying, for various reasons, and while I don't agree with it, we as westerners have no place telling other people that what they are doing is "objectively bad" even if we find the process detestable. True. And yet it must not prevent us from intervening if we think it's not right. It just won't be for the sake of doing the "objective right thing", that would be naive to think that way :D So, then you're a proponent of cultural imperialism? Instead of believing in moral realism? Either way, you're saying you think it should not hold us back to intervene. What then is your suggestion WE should do to intervene? Well, I don't know, haha (remember, "what now?" :D) but at least I'm aware of it. I just think that a lot of posters here don't know either. I posted here because I just didn't like when someone talked about science, reason and objectivity when this issue is really about culture, morality and ethics. Maybe I'm just arguing semantics here but I don't even think the sentence "This is objectively right/wrong" makes sense. That was me, among others maybe. This issue is about anything but culture. Culture has no say in matters when innocent lifes are being squashed. Science however shows that FGM is useless, and has harrowing effects on the women involved. That makes it objectively wrong. It makes it subjectively wrong from any rational perspective, but nothing is objectively wrong. Right and wrong are subjective value judgements, it's not right or wrong when a star goes supernova, it's not right or wrong when water evaporates, it simply is. It's not objectively wrong to murder people, but every rational person holds the strong subjective belief that it's wrong so it's safe to say "murder is wrong". Maybe he was just arguing semantics, as he acknowledged, but saying something is "objectively wrong" doesn't actually make sense at all. You lost this debate the moment you said that. That is THE most ignorant thing i have heard anyone say since 3rd grade. I'm guessing you went to school at some point. At exams and tests, did you just give them a paper saying "No answer is right or wrong, it's subjetive!" ?! Theres other examples, but this one should be fool proof enough to make you understand why you are wrong.
You're mixing up different senses of the word:
Adjective[edit]
wrong (comparative more wrong or wronger, superlative most wrong or wrongest)
1. Incorrect or untrue.
Ex: Some of your answers were correct, and some were wrong.
2. Asserting something incorrect or untrue.
Ex: You're wrong: he's not Superman at all.
3. Immoral, not good, bad.
Ex: It is wrong to lie.
We're talking about the 3rd sense, the wrong answers you give in tests pertain to the first sense.
|
Another case of the Western world forcing their "morality" on others. The only logical conclusion to this "white man's burdern" is war where America and other Western cultures "free" these "primitive" societies of their primitive traditions.
|
On July 28 2013 07:13 Crushinator wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2013 07:09 cloneThorN wrote:On July 28 2013 07:02 Reason wrote:On July 28 2013 06:57 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:49 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:41 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:39 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 06:34 Shival wrote:On July 28 2013 06:27 ZenithM wrote:You misunderstood my post. My question was "what can WE do?, rather than "WHAT can we do?". It's not our country, we don't have any control on legislation and education. So it is actually harder to grasp than you seem to think. In fact, I'll quote Mothra's informative link: There is nothing more difficult than persuading people to give up long-held cultural practices, especially those bound up in taboo subjects like sex. Fine, let me rephrase. Put external pressure on said government to provide legislation and education on the subject. Though, I don't really get your point, as you're constantly trying to say we should do nothing, simply because it's so damn hard to do anything. Guess we shouldn't have gone to the moon then... Lol, I never said that actually, re-read my posts if you want. My point is basically this one: On July 28 2013 02:42 ZenithM wrote:On July 28 2013 02:42 docvoc wrote:On July 28 2013 02:23 ZenithM wrote:
[quote]
Assuming that every human being can use "Rational judgement" to come up with the same conclusion is flawed anyway. In those countries, they're not using the same premises as you so they won't get to the same conclusion (that "FGM is bad").
For example, over there religious dogma is much more powerful than in western countries and can be the basis for a "reasoned" argument ("God wants A, hence B" is perfectly fine), which is kind of inconceivable for you.
So I agree with xMZ that in the end it comes down to a power struggle between cultures. If you want your "right thing" to prevail, fight and impose it on others.
And btw, there isn't really anything to discuss or debate in this thread, I'm sure nobody here actually support the practice :D. Good OP nonetheless, informative at least. The fact here is that there is no real "actual right." This is all based on perception. Zenith, you are very right to point out cultural differences, I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but I have to quote your comment because of how on point it is. The U.N. exists in a Western way, whereas these countries don't. The differences because of this make us think the action is barbaric, which isn't the case for a lot of the people taking part in it. The process is slowly dying, for various reasons, and while I don't agree with it, we as westerners have no place telling other people that what they are doing is "objectively bad" even if we find the process detestable. True. And yet it must not prevent us from intervening if we think it's not right. It just won't be for the sake of doing the "objective right thing", that would be naive to think that way :D So, then you're a proponent of cultural imperialism? Instead of believing in moral realism? Either way, you're saying you think it should not hold us back to intervene. What then is your suggestion WE should do to intervene? Well, I don't know, haha (remember, "what now?" :D) but at least I'm aware of it. I just think that a lot of posters here don't know either. I posted here because I just didn't like when someone talked about science, reason and objectivity when this issue is really about culture, morality and ethics. Maybe I'm just arguing semantics here but I don't even think the sentence "This is objectively right/wrong" makes sense. That was me, among others maybe. This issue is about anything but culture. Culture has no say in matters when innocent lifes are being squashed. Science however shows that FGM is useless, and has harrowing effects on the women involved. That makes it objectively wrong. It makes it subjectively wrong from any rational perspective, but nothing is objectively wrong. Right and wrong are subjective value judgements, it's not right or wrong when a star goes supernova, it's not right or wrong when water evaporates, it simply is. It's not objectively wrong to murder people, but every rational person holds the strong subjective belief that it's wrong so it's safe to say "murder is wrong". Maybe he was just arguing semantics, as he acknowledged, but saying something is "objectively wrong" doesn't actually make sense at all. You lost this debate the moment you said that. That is THE most ignorant thing i have heard anyone say since 3rd grade. I'm guessing you went to school at some point. At exams and tests, did you just give them a paper saying "No answer is right or wrong, it's subjetive!" ?! Theres other examples, but this one should be fool proof enough to make you understand why you are wrong. When he uses the word ''wrong'' he is not using it as a synonym to ''incorrect'' but rather as imorally wrong. There is a difference, I suggest you learn it,
Theres no difference, YOU are making that difference. If you say something cannot be immorally right or wrong, then there exists no moral, as you have no options to choose from. Everythiing wiill be both right and wrong, which is a paradox ancient lords used alot on uneducated and stupid people.
We grew away from that in the age of enlightment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
