|
The perception of right and wrong is part of Your cultural inhertiance,it is based in society You live, in Your experience with it. There are many societies in the world in which sex with 12 year old is right. Do You think its ok? I dont think so. Me neither. We have different cultural experience than them. It is obvious that we want our views to prevail, but we are not any more right than they are. Some things are just objectively wrong. Denying harmless people happiness is one of those things.
Relativistic moralism is stupid. You can't shake off cannibalism by saying "Well, it's just their culture!".
|
On August 03 2013 04:35 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:28 Silvanel wrote:
The problem is this is not about right and wrong. The perception of right and wrong is part of Your cultural inhertiance,it is based in society You live, in Your experience with it. There are many societies in the world in which sex with 12 year old is right. Do You think its ok? I dont think so. Me neither. We have different cultural experience than them. It is obvious that we want our views to prevail, but we are not any more right than they are.
I would love if people would finnaly acknoweldged it. Say: "We want Russia to comply with OUR World View rather than with ONE AND ONLY PROPER World View.
Its ok if You want people to think like You, its natural. But theres no right and wrong in morality,no good and bad. Only "our" and "theirs".
Relativistic? Yes. Sadly its the only thing that makes sense in moral philosophy.
Edit: This is in response to all people claiming its WRONG to prosecute homosexuals (or any behavior for that matter). Simply saying that relativism is the only thing that makes sense in moral philosophy does not make it true.
No, but anyone with good knowledge of moral philosphy knows that EVERY system of moral philosphy besides reltivism have huge internal problems. People are relucatant to accept relativism because it doesnt give You any answers and it deprives You of Your moral high ground. Relativism is sad. But its the only way that makes sense.
|
On August 03 2013 04:40 Silvanel wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:35 farvacola wrote:On August 03 2013 04:28 Silvanel wrote:
The problem is this is not about right and wrong. The perception of right and wrong is part of Your cultural inhertiance,it is based in society You live, in Your experience with it. There are many societies in the world in which sex with 12 year old is right. Do You think its ok? I dont think so. Me neither. We have different cultural experience than them. It is obvious that we want our views to prevail, but we are not any more right than they are.
I would love if people would finnaly acknoweldged it. Say: "We want Russia to comply with OUR World View rather than with ONE AND ONLY PROPER World View.
Its ok if You want people to think like You, its natural. But theres no right and wrong in morality,no good and bad. Only "our" and "theirs".
Relativistic? Yes. Sadly its the only thing that makes sense in moral philosophy.
Edit: This is in response to all people claiming its WRONG to prosecute homosexuals (or any behavior for that matter). Simply saying that relativism is the only thing that makes sense in moral philosophy does not make it true. No, but anyone with good knowledge of moral philosphy knows that EVERY system of moral philosphy besides reltivism have huge internal problems. People are relucatant to accept relativism because it doesnt give You any answers and it deprives You of Your moral high ground. Relativism is sad. But its the only way that makes sense.
This is not true though. The field of moral philosophy is full of disagreement, so much so that landing on any singular concept requires a fair bit of footwork, surely more so than merely saying "relativism is the only way." Check out Frogrubdown's thread on the subject for a nice write up.
|
On August 03 2013 04:35 Thorakh wrote:Show nested quote +The perception of right and wrong is part of Your cultural inhertiance,it is based in society You live, in Your experience with it. There are many societies in the world in which sex with 12 year old is right. Do You think its ok? I dont think so. Me neither. We have different cultural experience than them. It is obvious that we want our views to prevail, but we are not any more right than they are. Some things are just objectively wrong. Denying harmless people happiness is one of those things. Relativistic moralism is stupid. You can't shake off cannibalism by saying "Well, it's just their culture!".
You dont know what You are talking about. Saying i dont have moral high ground over cannibal is one thing. It doesnt mean i am gona accept his views and let him eat people.
|
It is quite simple to build a general ethical construct without being retardedly relativistic.
For a discussion to make any sense, you need a common set of axioms, and then you can derive from that. Going about this way is the only rational way. This has little to do with culture, your basic axioms can be very simple things that everyone agrees upon. For example something like "Hurting people is bad". You don't really need a lot more then that. In some cases, you get grey situations where it is not entirely obvious if something is hurting someone or not. In which case you can debate. But in many cases the result is obvious. A gay guy fucking another guy hurts noone. Thus it is not bad. Oppressing that guy hurt him for no positive result. Thus it is bad. See how this easily follows out of a simple axiom that i think most people would agree upon, and did not require any culture except accepting rationality to solve problems.
Of course, if you dislike the idea of rationality, then this won't work. But in that case there is really not a lot of use in a debate anyways, since at that point there is no way to get a real result anyways.
|
On August 03 2013 04:43 Silvanel wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:35 Thorakh wrote:The perception of right and wrong is part of Your cultural inhertiance,it is based in society You live, in Your experience with it. There are many societies in the world in which sex with 12 year old is right. Do You think its ok? I dont think so. Me neither. We have different cultural experience than them. It is obvious that we want our views to prevail, but we are not any more right than they are. Some things are just objectively wrong. Denying harmless people happiness is one of those things. Relativistic moralism is stupid. You can't shake off cannibalism by saying "Well, it's just their culture!". You dont know what You are talking about. Saying i dont have moral high ground over cannibal is one thing. It doesnt mean i am gona accept his views and let him eat people. But we do have the moral highground over anti-gay people for the simple reason that there factually is nothing wrong with homosexuality. There is not a single argument in favor of being anti-gay that holds water.
It's the same as having the moral highground over people who believe burning every second child gives them access to heaven. It's factually wrong.
|
On August 03 2013 04:11 FryBender wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 03:43 Feartheguru wrote:On August 03 2013 03:35 farvacola wrote:On August 03 2013 03:30 Feartheguru wrote:On August 03 2013 03:24 farvacola wrote:On August 03 2013 03:23 Feartheguru wrote:On August 03 2013 03:16 marvellosity wrote:
No, I didn't. There were 2 parts of his post and I responded to both. This shouldn't be so hard.
At the very least it's interesting you tried to pull me up earlier in the thread, them every single other respondent disagreed with you.
Then you're fine with the guy equating homosexuality and pedophilia, but repeatedly attack the person pulling him up on it.
Then you keep making this fallacious argument about gay rights elsewhere in the world.
Pretty clear what your agenda is in this thread. Earlier in the thread amounted to 3 people making the same assumptions and me telling you guys its not necessarily true. Don't add ad populum to your list of problems. I'm fine with the guy equating? Ya, cause his argument was made to point out inconsistent arguments in this thread. Then I attack you for pulling him up on it cause what you say makes no sense and deserve to be called out. I have not made a single comment regarding my beliefs (and believe it or not I am extremely socially liberal). I'm glad my agenda is clear, too bad I can't clear your shit fast enough. On what basis is the equation of homosexuality with pedophilia at all intellectually honest? Only on the basis of public perseption in regards to what is ok behind closed doors with no laws compromised. Since gays and pedophiles both deviate from the "norm", in a situation where neither breaks any laws to satisfy themselves, why is one group persecuted here for their orientation while the other is not, when neither is doing anything wrong. A lot of this has to do with the inherently problematic nature of pedophilic material; the vast majority of it is created alongside the exploitation of those unable to give consent. It's nice to pretend that pedophiles are sitting behind closed doors and pleasuring themselves to mere illustrations, but, given what we know in terms of the proliferation of child pornography, this is not the case. In short, the practice of pedophilia is closely enough tied to exploitation that tolerance of it is highly questionable, considerably more so than any concerns in regards to homosexuality. Yes, and I agree that pedophelia is more problematic than homosexuality from a pragmatic viewpoint, which you are taking here. However, the equivocation was based on a moral viewpoint, why is one group persecuted for their natural (I assume I am fair in assuming this is near consensus that sexual orientation is natural and not chosen) desires, while another is not, even when the people themselves (consuming the troublesome materials you mention) are doing nothing wrong, Asking pedophilic people to not view material that satifies them to reduce the people harms seems fairly akin to asking gays to stay in the closet for the betterment of society (which is partially the case in Russia, since they prefer closeted gays with children than happy married gays.) Gay people are not simply asked to stay in the closet. The negative propaganda against homosexuals is still perfectly legal (and for the most part encouraged) while the defense of homosexuals is illegal. Therefore the law is not meant to simply protect the general population's sensibilities as you imply (if that were true then all talk about homesecuality whether pro or anti would be forbidden), but to promote a state view that homosexuals are less human then heterosexuals. If you see nothing wrong with that then I guess there is nothing left to argue about.
Thanks you for perfectly portraying exactly what I was talking about, the absolute disregard for logic and intellectual honesty shown by some people here. The entire point of the comparison is "Why are we trying to make pedophilic people less than human, given xyz similarities they have to homosexuals, when WE KNOW HOMOSEXUALS SHOULDN"T BE TREATED AS LESS THAN HUMAN".
You cannot take a tiny supporting piece of an argument, pretend it is the key to the whole thing, warp it into something indefensible, bash that, then proclaim the moral high ground.
Tell me how gay people not simply being asked to stay in the closet in any way even reduces the validity of what I said, or better yet, how it's even relevant.
|
On August 03 2013 04:42 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:40 Silvanel wrote:On August 03 2013 04:35 farvacola wrote:On August 03 2013 04:28 Silvanel wrote:
The problem is this is not about right and wrong. The perception of right and wrong is part of Your cultural inhertiance,it is based in society You live, in Your experience with it. There are many societies in the world in which sex with 12 year old is right. Do You think its ok? I dont think so. Me neither. We have different cultural experience than them. It is obvious that we want our views to prevail, but we are not any more right than they are.
I would love if people would finnaly acknoweldged it. Say: "We want Russia to comply with OUR World View rather than with ONE AND ONLY PROPER World View.
Its ok if You want people to think like You, its natural. But theres no right and wrong in morality,no good and bad. Only "our" and "theirs".
Relativistic? Yes. Sadly its the only thing that makes sense in moral philosophy.
Edit: This is in response to all people claiming its WRONG to prosecute homosexuals (or any behavior for that matter). Simply saying that relativism is the only thing that makes sense in moral philosophy does not make it true. No, but anyone with good knowledge of moral philosphy knows that EVERY system of moral philosphy besides reltivism have huge internal problems. People are relucatant to accept relativism because it doesnt give You any answers and it deprives You of Your moral high ground. Relativism is sad. But its the only way that makes sense. This is not true though. The field of moral philosophy is full of disagreement, so much so that landing on any singular concept requires a fair bit of footwork, surely more so than merely saying "relativism is the only way." Check out Frogrubdown's thread on the subject for a nice write up.
And here i am again....i have major in philosophy, after 4th year of studying (i think), i told myself that i wont waste anymore time with ethics and aesthetics. But now i am (again) arguing with strangers over internet...fogive me....I simply think that world would be much nicer place if everyone would droped moral high ground. You might not agree with me (most people dont), but i really thought about it for a long time.
|
"Why are we trying to make pedophilic people less than human, given xyz similarities they have to homosexuals, when WE KNOW HOMOSEXUALS SHOULDN"T BE TREATED AS LESS THAN HUMAN". Simply being a pedophile is no grounds for hate, as I'm pretty fucking sure people do not chose to be a pedophile (plus simply being attracted to children is not harmful in and of itself). What is wrong is acting on it.
Acting on your homosexuality is not wrong because it doesn't harm anyone. That's the difference.
|
On August 03 2013 04:59 Thorakh wrote:Show nested quote +"Why are we trying to make pedophilic people less than human, given xyz similarities they have to homosexuals, when WE KNOW HOMOSEXUALS SHOULDN"T BE TREATED AS LESS THAN HUMAN". Simply being a pedophile is no grounds for hate, as I'm pretty fucking sure people do not chose to be a pedophile. What is wrong is acting on your pedophilia. Acting on your homosexuality is not wrong because it doesn't harm anyone. That's the difference.
People are arguing that simply being a pedophile IS grounds for hate, because unless you supress it completely, it is hurting others (viewing material in their own home still counts since the making of the material caused people to be hurt). They are for the descrimination of pedophiles for this reason.
This is not clear cut right or wrong, hense there is a discussion.
Most people believe the descrimination is reasonable, for the reason that it is overall better for society. So the question is, how is this different than descriminating against gays, if the majority of Russians think them being suppressed is better for THEIR society.
Disclaimer: In this thread all I have tried to do is clear up arguments and argue against people who misrepresent others. There's no logic behind responding to posts like this one attacking me personnally (And presuming I side with the homophobic because I do not join in the circlejerk) as I do not present my point of view.
|
On August 03 2013 04:59 Silvanel wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:42 farvacola wrote:On August 03 2013 04:40 Silvanel wrote:On August 03 2013 04:35 farvacola wrote:On August 03 2013 04:28 Silvanel wrote:
The problem is this is not about right and wrong. The perception of right and wrong is part of Your cultural inhertiance,it is based in society You live, in Your experience with it. There are many societies in the world in which sex with 12 year old is right. Do You think its ok? I dont think so. Me neither. We have different cultural experience than them. It is obvious that we want our views to prevail, but we are not any more right than they are.
I would love if people would finnaly acknoweldged it. Say: "We want Russia to comply with OUR World View rather than with ONE AND ONLY PROPER World View.
Its ok if You want people to think like You, its natural. But theres no right and wrong in morality,no good and bad. Only "our" and "theirs".
Relativistic? Yes. Sadly its the only thing that makes sense in moral philosophy.
Edit: This is in response to all people claiming its WRONG to prosecute homosexuals (or any behavior for that matter). Simply saying that relativism is the only thing that makes sense in moral philosophy does not make it true. No, but anyone with good knowledge of moral philosphy knows that EVERY system of moral philosphy besides reltivism have huge internal problems. People are relucatant to accept relativism because it doesnt give You any answers and it deprives You of Your moral high ground. Relativism is sad. But its the only way that makes sense. This is not true though. The field of moral philosophy is full of disagreement, so much so that landing on any singular concept requires a fair bit of footwork, surely more so than merely saying "relativism is the only way." Check out Frogrubdown's thread on the subject for a nice write up. And here i am again....i have major in philosophy, after 4th year of studying (i think), i told myself that i wont waste anymore time with ethics and aesthetics. But now i am (again) arguing with strangers over internet...fogive me....I simply think that world would be much nicer place if everyone would droped moral high ground. You might not agree with me (most people dont), but i really thought about it for a long time.
you have a major if philosophy but you don't think that people who think its okay to have sex with 12 year olds are worse than those that don't?
|
On August 03 2013 05:08 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:59 Silvanel wrote:On August 03 2013 04:42 farvacola wrote:On August 03 2013 04:40 Silvanel wrote:On August 03 2013 04:35 farvacola wrote:On August 03 2013 04:28 Silvanel wrote:
The problem is this is not about right and wrong. The perception of right and wrong is part of Your cultural inhertiance,it is based in society You live, in Your experience with it. There are many societies in the world in which sex with 12 year old is right. Do You think its ok? I dont think so. Me neither. We have different cultural experience than them. It is obvious that we want our views to prevail, but we are not any more right than they are.
I would love if people would finnaly acknoweldged it. Say: "We want Russia to comply with OUR World View rather than with ONE AND ONLY PROPER World View.
Its ok if You want people to think like You, its natural. But theres no right and wrong in morality,no good and bad. Only "our" and "theirs".
Relativistic? Yes. Sadly its the only thing that makes sense in moral philosophy.
Edit: This is in response to all people claiming its WRONG to prosecute homosexuals (or any behavior for that matter). Simply saying that relativism is the only thing that makes sense in moral philosophy does not make it true. No, but anyone with good knowledge of moral philosphy knows that EVERY system of moral philosphy besides reltivism have huge internal problems. People are relucatant to accept relativism because it doesnt give You any answers and it deprives You of Your moral high ground. Relativism is sad. But its the only way that makes sense. This is not true though. The field of moral philosophy is full of disagreement, so much so that landing on any singular concept requires a fair bit of footwork, surely more so than merely saying "relativism is the only way." Check out Frogrubdown's thread on the subject for a nice write up. And here i am again....i have major in philosophy, after 4th year of studying (i think), i told myself that i wont waste anymore time with ethics and aesthetics. But now i am (again) arguing with strangers over internet...fogive me....I simply think that world would be much nicer place if everyone would droped moral high ground. You might not agree with me (most people dont), but i really thought about it for a long time. you have a major if philosophy but you don't think that people who think its okay to have sex with 12 year olds are worse than those that don't?
I do despise it (pedohiles), i think its harmful to society, i think it should be punishable. But i do accept the fact that my views are product of my cultural heritage. The fact that someone have different cultural heritage doesnt mean i have to let him do whatever he pleases.
|
On August 03 2013 05:05 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:59 Thorakh wrote:"Why are we trying to make pedophilic people less than human, given xyz similarities they have to homosexuals, when WE KNOW HOMOSEXUALS SHOULDN"T BE TREATED AS LESS THAN HUMAN". Simply being a pedophile is no grounds for hate, as I'm pretty fucking sure people do not chose to be a pedophile. What is wrong is acting on your pedophilia. Acting on your homosexuality is not wrong because it doesn't harm anyone. That's the difference. People are arguing that simply being a pedophile IS grounds for hate, because unless you supress it completely, it is hurting others (viewing material in their own home still counts since the making of the material caused people to be hurt). They are for the descrimination of pedophiles for this reason. This is not clear cut right or wrong, hense there is a discussion.
It depends on the material being viewed. I have no problem with someone viewing lolicon stuff. I have a problem with someone viewing porn involving real children. As those are getting hurt in the production of it.
As said before, the logically consistent position to have is that being pedophile in itself is not bad, though probably a really hard situation to be in. Acting on it, or watching stuff involving children getting hurt is. Some people have other opinions. I disagree with them. A lot of the problem here stems from the confusion regarding what being a pedophile actually means. Most people assume that a pedophile is someone that molest children, while it actually just means someone that is sexually attracted to children, which is slightly different.
Along the same lines, being gay is not wrong. A gay man having sex with another gay man is not wrong. A gay man raping another man, whether gay or not, is wrong. A straight man being straight is not wrong. A straight man having sex with a women, no matter what they do as long as both consent to it, is still not wrong. A straight man raping a women is wrong. However, the pedophile does not have that option of having sex with a child without it being morally wrong since there is no way to have sex with a child that does not hurt it.
I think you are trying to form this weird argument that assumes that everyone who is not you has the exact same opinion and are arguing against inconsistency in that opinion that is actually a lot of different opinions held by a lot of different people, some of which are irrational.
|
On August 03 2013 05:13 Silvanel wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 05:08 ComaDose wrote:On August 03 2013 04:59 Silvanel wrote:On August 03 2013 04:42 farvacola wrote:On August 03 2013 04:40 Silvanel wrote:On August 03 2013 04:35 farvacola wrote:On August 03 2013 04:28 Silvanel wrote:
The problem is this is not about right and wrong. The perception of right and wrong is part of Your cultural inhertiance,it is based in society You live, in Your experience with it. There are many societies in the world in which sex with 12 year old is right. Do You think its ok? I dont think so. Me neither. We have different cultural experience than them. It is obvious that we want our views to prevail, but we are not any more right than they are.
I would love if people would finnaly acknoweldged it. Say: "We want Russia to comply with OUR World View rather than with ONE AND ONLY PROPER World View.
Its ok if You want people to think like You, its natural. But theres no right and wrong in morality,no good and bad. Only "our" and "theirs".
Relativistic? Yes. Sadly its the only thing that makes sense in moral philosophy.
Edit: This is in response to all people claiming its WRONG to prosecute homosexuals (or any behavior for that matter). Simply saying that relativism is the only thing that makes sense in moral philosophy does not make it true. No, but anyone with good knowledge of moral philosphy knows that EVERY system of moral philosphy besides reltivism have huge internal problems. People are relucatant to accept relativism because it doesnt give You any answers and it deprives You of Your moral high ground. Relativism is sad. But its the only way that makes sense. This is not true though. The field of moral philosophy is full of disagreement, so much so that landing on any singular concept requires a fair bit of footwork, surely more so than merely saying "relativism is the only way." Check out Frogrubdown's thread on the subject for a nice write up. And here i am again....i have major in philosophy, after 4th year of studying (i think), i told myself that i wont waste anymore time with ethics and aesthetics. But now i am (again) arguing with strangers over internet...fogive me....I simply think that world would be much nicer place if everyone would droped moral high ground. You might not agree with me (most people dont), but i really thought about it for a long time. you have a major if philosophy but you don't think that people who think its okay to have sex with 12 year olds are worse than those that don't? I do despise it (pedohiles), i think its harmful to society, i think it should be punishable. But i do accept the fact that my views are product of my cultural heritage. The fact that someone have different cultural heritage doesnt mean i have to let him do whatever he pleases.
okay but having sex with minors incapable of making informed consent is always wrong regardless of cultural heritage
|
On August 03 2013 05:13 Silvanel wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 05:08 ComaDose wrote:On August 03 2013 04:59 Silvanel wrote:On August 03 2013 04:42 farvacola wrote:On August 03 2013 04:40 Silvanel wrote:On August 03 2013 04:35 farvacola wrote:On August 03 2013 04:28 Silvanel wrote:
The problem is this is not about right and wrong. The perception of right and wrong is part of Your cultural inhertiance,it is based in society You live, in Your experience with it. There are many societies in the world in which sex with 12 year old is right. Do You think its ok? I dont think so. Me neither. We have different cultural experience than them. It is obvious that we want our views to prevail, but we are not any more right than they are.
I would love if people would finnaly acknoweldged it. Say: "We want Russia to comply with OUR World View rather than with ONE AND ONLY PROPER World View.
Its ok if You want people to think like You, its natural. But theres no right and wrong in morality,no good and bad. Only "our" and "theirs".
Relativistic? Yes. Sadly its the only thing that makes sense in moral philosophy.
Edit: This is in response to all people claiming its WRONG to prosecute homosexuals (or any behavior for that matter). Simply saying that relativism is the only thing that makes sense in moral philosophy does not make it true. No, but anyone with good knowledge of moral philosphy knows that EVERY system of moral philosphy besides reltivism have huge internal problems. People are relucatant to accept relativism because it doesnt give You any answers and it deprives You of Your moral high ground. Relativism is sad. But its the only way that makes sense. This is not true though. The field of moral philosophy is full of disagreement, so much so that landing on any singular concept requires a fair bit of footwork, surely more so than merely saying "relativism is the only way." Check out Frogrubdown's thread on the subject for a nice write up. And here i am again....i have major in philosophy, after 4th year of studying (i think), i told myself that i wont waste anymore time with ethics and aesthetics. But now i am (again) arguing with strangers over internet...fogive me....I simply think that world would be much nicer place if everyone would droped moral high ground. You might not agree with me (most people dont), but i really thought about it for a long time. you have a major if philosophy but you don't think that people who think its okay to have sex with 12 year olds are worse than those that don't? I do despise it (pedohiles), i think its harmful to society, i think it should be punishable. But i do accept the fact that my views are product of my cultural heritage. The fact that someone have different cultural heritage doesnt mean i have to let him do whatever he pleases.
You really don't think your views are formed by reasoning and logic as well? Sure, some of these trickier things, for example, age of consent, I believe is mostly cultural. In most places it's 18, in some it's 16 etc. I think the difference is pretty marginal.
But some subjects have derived from common sense and the universal "truths", if you wanna call it that, about ourselves.
|
Drawing pedophilia into this discussion is such a lame argument.
This is not about sexual preference, it's about gender discrimination. The difference between a heterosexual and a heterosexual pedophile is the age of consent, as defined by law, same in Russia as everywhere else. Making this different when it's people of the same sex has nothing to do with their sexual preference, but all with that of the people who made this law.
I like the Games, but I hope they get boycotted this time around, whether this will end up being enforced or not. It's a backward law that has nothing to do with mutual understanding in the spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play. If that's your "culture", then don't apply for hosting them.
|
On August 03 2013 04:59 Silvanel wrote:Show nested quote +On August 03 2013 04:42 farvacola wrote:On August 03 2013 04:40 Silvanel wrote:On August 03 2013 04:35 farvacola wrote:On August 03 2013 04:28 Silvanel wrote:
The problem is this is not about right and wrong. The perception of right and wrong is part of Your cultural inhertiance,it is based in society You live, in Your experience with it. There are many societies in the world in which sex with 12 year old is right. Do You think its ok? I dont think so. Me neither. We have different cultural experience than them. It is obvious that we want our views to prevail, but we are not any more right than they are.
I would love if people would finnaly acknoweldged it. Say: "We want Russia to comply with OUR World View rather than with ONE AND ONLY PROPER World View.
Its ok if You want people to think like You, its natural. But theres no right and wrong in morality,no good and bad. Only "our" and "theirs".
Relativistic? Yes. Sadly its the only thing that makes sense in moral philosophy.
Edit: This is in response to all people claiming its WRONG to prosecute homosexuals (or any behavior for that matter). Simply saying that relativism is the only thing that makes sense in moral philosophy does not make it true. No, but anyone with good knowledge of moral philosphy knows that EVERY system of moral philosphy besides reltivism have huge internal problems. People are relucatant to accept relativism because it doesnt give You any answers and it deprives You of Your moral high ground. Relativism is sad. But its the only way that makes sense. This is not true though. The field of moral philosophy is full of disagreement, so much so that landing on any singular concept requires a fair bit of footwork, surely more so than merely saying "relativism is the only way." Check out Frogrubdown's thread on the subject for a nice write up. And here i am again....i have major in philosophy, after 4th year of studying (i think), i told myself that i wont waste anymore time with ethics and aesthetics. But now i am (again) arguing with strangers over internet...fogive me....I simply think that world would be much nicer place if everyone would droped moral high ground. You might not agree with me (most people dont), but i really thought about it for a long time.
Actually, the people criticizing Russia's anti-gay laws do have the moral high ground, since all other things being equal the removal of these laws would result in less harm done to others.
|
Russian Federation325 Posts
Haha, we have a bunch of hateful/censor laws passed this year, not to mention multi-billion corruption with little to none official investigation. "Gay propaganda law" is the least problem here lol.
|
Trying to draw pedophilia into a discussion about homosexuality is like the new Godwin's law
|
On August 03 2013 06:06 laegoose wrote:
Haha, we have a bunch of hateful/censor laws passed this year, not to mention multi-billion corruption with little to none official investigation. "Gay propaganda law" is the least problem here lol.
what are the other problems? ill bash on all your bad laws.
this one is just the one im aware of right now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
