User Tag List

First 678910 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 143

  1. #71
    null Jonny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    FREE
    Posts
    2,484

    Default

    I don't believe there is anything faulty about what I wrote, I was simply trying to pinpoint exactly what you mean by equality. We have both explicit (the law) and implicit (mores) social contracts at work in our society. It is my contention that the serial killer is essentially at the mercy of his genetics and upbringing, and despite being cognizant of the nature of his crimes, he still cannot help himself. There is an absolute absence of true equality in our society, and when we try to construct any system which seeks to act upon one individual while not acting upon another (regardless of criteria) we are establishing an unequal system. By your logic, a law whereby sodomy was made illegal, so long as every individual who practiced sodomy faced the same punishment, would be considered a fair law. However, just as serial killers are more driven to murder, male homosexuals are more driven to commit sodomy and are therefore more susceptible to suffering the consequences of said law. This is essentially unfair.

    You seem to be in support of a legal system which is at its heart unfair, but opposed to a moral system on the basis that it is unfair. Productive, intelligent, rich, powerful people are seen as better because by many standards they are better. They are better at imparting their wills upon the environment, getting things done, and affecting society in ways which might be better for everyone (including the less intelligent, less productive, poor people). Just like with laws: You do X, you receive punishment Y; this social system provides positive and negative consequences when certain criteria are met: You achieve success, you are treated better. And, just as with laws, some people are more naturally equipped to 'meet' certain criteria.

    Does this make sense?
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  2. #72
    Secret Sex Freak Hazashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INFj
    Posts
    1,157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnyboy View Post
    I don't believe there is anything faulty about what I wrote, I was simply trying to pinpoint exactly what you mean by equality. We have both explicit (the law) and implicit (mores) social contracts at work in our society. It is my contention that the serial killer is essentially at the mercy of his genetics and upbringing, and despite being cognizant of the nature of his crimes, he still cannot help himself. There is an absolute absence of true equality in our society, and when we try to construct any system which seeks to act upon one individual while not acting upon another (regardless of criteria) we are establishing an unequal system. By your logic, a law whereby sodomy was made illegal, so long as every individual who practiced sodomy faced the same punishment, would be considered a fair law. However, just as serial killers are more driven to murder, male homosexuals are more driven to commit sodomy and are therefore more susceptible to suffering the consequences of said law. This is essentially unfair.

    You seem to be in support of a legal system which is at its heart unfair, but opposed to a moral system on the basis that it is unfair. Productive, intelligent, rich, powerful people are seen as better because by many standards they are better. They are better at imparting their wills upon the environment, getting things done, and affecting society in ways which might be better for everyone (including the less intelligent, less productive, poor people). Just like with laws: You do X, you receive punishment Y; this social system provides positive and negative consequences when certain criteria are met: You achieve success, you are treated better. And, just as with laws, some people are more naturally equipped to 'meet' certain criteria.

    Does this make sense?
    Ah, so you're a believer in absolute determinism. Alright, so if a person is biologically predetermined to a set of features and qualities that are likely to result in his success, why is it fair to reward them to the detriment of someone who committed no crime but to lose the genetic lottery?

    For the record, the verdict is still out on the determinism vs. free will debate, with various fields of science coming to different conclusions, so it wouldn't make sense to structure a society on an unverifiable idea but rather the pragmatic approach would be to perfect the systems that we already use.
    MBTI: INFP
    Enneagram: 6w7, phobic
    Tritype: 6-9-2
    Instinctual Variant: Sx/Sp
    Temperament: Pure Supine
    D&D Alignment: Neutral Good
    Political Stance: Solid Liberal
    Religious Views: Atheist

    Fi > Ne > Ti > Fe > Se > Si > Te > Ni

    "Forgiveness means letting go of the past." ~ Gerald Jampolsky
    "I am justice!" ~ Light Yagami, Death Note
    "The choices people make tell you a lot about a person, but the reasons [...] tell you even more." ~ Albus Dumbledore (paraphrased)

    Tatiana ♥

  3. #73
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnyboy View Post
    I've always resented these T/F distinctions because at the very heart of any quality analysis is a clear understanding of the desires of the involved parties. It would be abhorrently foolish to press forward in the name of efficiency without a clear understanding of what the absolute goals of the actions were, and it would be equally foolish to attempt to achieve a particular set of desires without spending time logically analyzing the situation. Your post is a grotesque oversimplification. Cutting spending, increasing taxes, providing welfare, balancing the budget, et cetera, are all good only insofar as they facilitate a state which most closely resembles the ideal (which itself must be derived from an analysis of the aggregate desires of the populace). Furthermore, given the dynamic nature of our society, each is perhaps an ideal at one time or another, but none should be blindly touted as an absolutely superior method.
    Well,
    I did cover in there that behind the T judgment was F, and behind the F was T.
    I was in a bit of a rush, and would have liked to expound upon that better (like your points), but I thought everyone would get the gist of it.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  4. #74
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hazashin View Post
    ...so it wouldn't make sense to structure a society on an unverifiable idea but rather the pragmatic approach would be to perfect the systems that we already use.
    How very conservative of you to say.

  5. #75
    Secret Sex Freak Hazashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INFj
    Posts
    1,157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    How very conservative of you to say.
    What, liberals can't be pragmatic? It just doesn't make sense to redesign society based on shoddy evidence, at best.
    MBTI: INFP
    Enneagram: 6w7, phobic
    Tritype: 6-9-2
    Instinctual Variant: Sx/Sp
    Temperament: Pure Supine
    D&D Alignment: Neutral Good
    Political Stance: Solid Liberal
    Religious Views: Atheist

    Fi > Ne > Ti > Fe > Se > Si > Te > Ni

    "Forgiveness means letting go of the past." ~ Gerald Jampolsky
    "I am justice!" ~ Light Yagami, Death Note
    "The choices people make tell you a lot about a person, but the reasons [...] tell you even more." ~ Albus Dumbledore (paraphrased)

    Tatiana ♥

  6. #76
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hazashin View Post
    What, liberals can't be pragmatic? It just doesn't make sense to redesign society based on shoddy evidence, at best.
    Conservatives are skeptical of any attempts to redesign society's basic structures - since those structures and whatnot are based upon the experience of countless previous generations("Democracy of the dead" as GK Chesterton called it). An old saying goes that it's better to deal with the devil you know than with the devil you don't know. This doesn't rule out prudential reform when needed, in fact it's the key to the long-term conservation of a society(conservativism is about conserving after all).

    So congrats, you're on your way to becoming a Burkean.

  7. #77
    Secret Sex Freak Hazashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INFj
    Posts
    1,157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    Conservatives are skeptical of any attempts to redesign society's basic structures - since those structures and whatnot are based upon the experience of countless previous generations("Democracy of the dead" as GK Chesterton called it). An old saying goes that it's better to deal with the devil you know than with the devil you don't know. This doesn't rule out prudential reform when needed, in fact it's the key to the long-term conservation of a society(conservativism is about conserving after all).

    So congrats, you're on your way to becoming a Burkean.
    Uh, no. I'm not skeptical of general reform -- in fact, I embrace sweeping changes to society; however, this specific instance is a reform for the worse -- if you recall, Fascists were for societal reformation, and no one would call them liberal. It's the nature of the reform that matters.
    MBTI: INFP
    Enneagram: 6w7, phobic
    Tritype: 6-9-2
    Instinctual Variant: Sx/Sp
    Temperament: Pure Supine
    D&D Alignment: Neutral Good
    Political Stance: Solid Liberal
    Religious Views: Atheist

    Fi > Ne > Ti > Fe > Se > Si > Te > Ni

    "Forgiveness means letting go of the past." ~ Gerald Jampolsky
    "I am justice!" ~ Light Yagami, Death Note
    "The choices people make tell you a lot about a person, but the reasons [...] tell you even more." ~ Albus Dumbledore (paraphrased)

    Tatiana ♥

  8. #78
    Yup
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    Istj
    Posts
    1,515

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonnyboy View Post
    I don't believe there is anything faulty about what I wrote, I was simply trying to pinpoint exactly what you mean by equality. We have both explicit (the law) and implicit (mores) social contracts at work in our society. It is my contention that the serial killer is essentially at the mercy of his genetics and upbringing, and despite being cognizant of the nature of his crimes, he still cannot help himself. There is an absolute absence of true equality in our society, and when we try to construct any system which seeks to act upon one individual while not acting upon another (regardless of criteria) we are establishing an unequal system. By your logic, a law whereby sodomy was made illegal, so long as every individual who practiced sodomy faced the same punishment, would be considered a fair law. However, just as serial killers are more driven to murder, male homosexuals are more driven to commit sodomy and are therefore more susceptible to suffering the consequences of said law. This is essentially unfair.

    You seem to be in support of a legal system which is at its heart unfair, but opposed to a moral system on the basis that it is unfair. Productive, intelligent, rich, powerful people are seen as better because by many standards they are better. They are better at imparting their wills upon the environment, getting things done, and affecting society in ways which might be better for everyone (including the less intelligent, less productive, poor people). Just like with laws: You do X, you receive punishment Y; this social system provides positive and negative consequences when certain criteria are met: You achieve success, you are treated better. And, just as with laws, some people are more naturally equipped to 'meet' certain criteria.

    Does this make sense?
    consider yourself "typed"



    carry on

  9. #79
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hazashin View Post
    Uh, no. I'm not skeptical of general reform -- in fact, I embrace sweeping changes to society; however, this specific instance is a reform for the worse -- if you recall, Fascists were for societal reformation, and no one would call them liberal. It's the nature of the reform that matters.

    You were saying?

    So now you're for sweeping changes to society, after you just said that's not really a good idea. But then you say what matters is the nature of the reform. This again is a conservative concept, one well articulated by John Henry Newman - who noted the strong difference between responsible and irresponsible changes to society. Not all forms of change are equal the conservative would insist, and you the self-proclaimed liberal seems to agree. Reform by definition is about "returning to form", just like radical in its original meaning is about "returning to roots".

  10. #80
    Secret Sex Freak Hazashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INFj
    Posts
    1,157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post

    You were saying?

    So now you're for sweeping changes to society, after you just said that's not really a good idea. But then you say what matters is the nature of the reform. This again is a conservative concept, one well articulated by John Henry Newman - who noted the strong difference between responsible and irresponsible changes to society. Not all forms of change are equal the conservative would insist, and you the self-proclaimed liberal seems to agree. Reform by definition is about "returning to form", just like radical in its original meaning is about "returning to roots".
    There's reform to accomplish liberal goals and there's also reform to accomplish conservative goals; the act of reform itself is neutral.
    MBTI: INFP
    Enneagram: 6w7, phobic
    Tritype: 6-9-2
    Instinctual Variant: Sx/Sp
    Temperament: Pure Supine
    D&D Alignment: Neutral Good
    Political Stance: Solid Liberal
    Religious Views: Atheist

    Fi > Ne > Ti > Fe > Se > Si > Te > Ni

    "Forgiveness means letting go of the past." ~ Gerald Jampolsky
    "I am justice!" ~ Light Yagami, Death Note
    "The choices people make tell you a lot about a person, but the reasons [...] tell you even more." ~ Albus Dumbledore (paraphrased)

    Tatiana ♥

Similar Threads

  1. The psychology of forum and online dynamics
    By Geoff in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 119
    Last Post: 09-04-2015, 05:45 PM
  2. What is the point of the 16-Types?
    By ygolo in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-09-2008, 03:54 PM
  3. What is the purpose of Law?
    By The_Liquid_Laser in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 08-03-2008, 10:51 PM
  4. What is the purpose of Science Fiction?
    By The Ü™ in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 03-04-2008, 06:53 PM
  5. What is the point of the MBTI?
    By Dufresne in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-31-2007, 04:37 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO