User Tag List

First 31112131415 Last

Results 121 to 130 of 182

  1. #121
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoff View Post
    Probably true... values and projections all *seem* to depend on the upbringing and social conditioning. There might be some labels and identities that are physically inherent. Some stuff we are born with whether we like it or not. A good example is probably aesthetics following the golden ratio. it seems universal in culture, and is based on a ratio massively present throughout nature. So, maybe, this is an example of an inherent value of "pleasing to behold". I know.. isn't a moral.. I'm just chucking it in the mix*

    *damned spacey NPs
    Nevermind the fact that it's not a moral value, even a quality like beauty is not inherent in the object itself; as you said, it's something we're born with. So, the judgment emanates from the subject, not the object.

  2. #122
    Lallygag Moderator Geoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INXP
    Posts
    5,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    Nevermind the fact that it's not a moral value, even a quality like beauty is not inherent in the object itself; as you said, it's something we're born with. So, the judgment emanates from the subject, not the object.
    Yes, that's true.. that is what it is, but the cause might not be relativism. I'm driving at us being borne with some inherent judgements, which makes the relativism not total, there might be some starting absolute values, that then vary according to social conditioning. No, I don't know if this is right, I raise it for consideration...

  3. #123
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoff View Post
    Yes, that's true.. that is what it is, but the cause might not be relativism. I'm driving at us being borne with some inherent judgements, which makes the relativism not total, there might be some starting absolute values, that then vary according to social conditioning. No, I don't know if this is right, I raise it for consideration...
    I see what you're saying (and get that you're just speculating, which is fun).

    We could bring it back to morality pretty easily. Is incest right or wrong? Incest taboos are pretty universal for whatever reason. Does that make incest wrong? No, because incest is still just incest. It's just an event, like any other. It's our feelings about that event that color our perception of it and give it some valence (in this case, negative). Your point is well taken, Sir Geoff.

  4. #124
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    Question answered!
    Events are just events. Those judgments we form are dependent on the norms we're surrounded with and the values we create, but they're not inherent to nature themselves; they're projected outward.
    You'll get no argument from me there.

    When I talk about the inviolable right to choice as to what is done to you directly, I'm talking socially, as in "if society is to function positively, this needs to be the case". It's a sorta progression from the given point that nature has equipped us with a desire to work in groups/communities, and a by-product of that is the need for a certain level of harmony, which in turn is best achieved, IMO, by affording to each individual, and respecting, this right to choice.

    I wouldn't argue that any of the implications of that, as they vary from individual to individual, were in any objective sense applicable to every individual. That is, I wouldn't argue that the ability to become a slave for a person who chooses to be one is therefore morally applicable to someone who doesn't, or that the choice of someone who chooses not to be youthenized has any business being forced on someone who chooses to be, etc...

    Don't get me wrong... I'm approximately 90% relativist - the other 10% is the caveat "...but some things are best considered absolute (albeit with variable implications that are only valid subjectively) for society to function harmoniously"

    Oh and by the way Edahn, you argue and construct sentences here in a way that reminds me strongly of my brother, who is ENFP
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  5. #125
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524

    Default Relativism and Magic

    All environments are invisible, even those that contain values.

    And a change in enviroments is also invisible because it only affects us unconsciously.

    So at the unconscious level we know something is going on so we project it outwards so we can control it.

    For instance, as our inner environment is changing, we project it onto the outer environment. And guess what! We discover it is changing too.

    And we form a global religion to control it.

    This is called, "magical thinking", and it is irresistible.

    In the same way we all have an inner life which is largely unconscious. So in order to control it we project it outwards onto four magical letters. The four magical letters that have been assigned to me are INTJ.

    It is irrelevant that all psychometricians and the encyclopedia describe MBTI as Unreliable and Invalid, because MBTI meets our deepest needs.

    It doesn't matter that MBTI comes from a most unsavory source because it promises to control our inner life, our inner impulses.

    In fact MBTI is truely magical.

    And the price of magic is common sense.

    But it is a price worth paying otherwise we are at the mercy of our inner life.

    And of course Relativism is magical thinking - rather than seeing how our environments are changing around us, we decide our values are only relative.

    Relativism is exquisite magic.

    Victor.

  6. #126
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by substitute View Post
    Oh and by the way Edahn, you argue and construct sentences here in a way that reminds me strongly of my brother, who is ENFP

  7. #127
    RETIRED CzeCze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    GONE
    Posts
    9,051

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    I second this inscrutable look (of disbelief.)
    “If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.” ― Oscar Wilde

    "I'm outtie 5000" ― Romulux

    Johari/Nohari

  8. #128
    `~~Philosoflying~~` SillySapienne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    9,849

    Default

    thirded
    `
    'Cause you can't handle me...

    "A lie is a lie even if everyone believes it. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it." - David Stevens

    "That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is."

    Veritatem dies aperit

    Ride si sapis

    Intelligentle sparkles

  9. #129
    desert pelican Owl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiddo View Post
    None of these ideas [i.e., those concerning innate human rights] existed before the Enlightenment.
    It is true that natural law was not very popular before the Enlightenment, but it was taught by Hobbes, Aquinas, and Aristotle. Indeed, Natural law theory appears in Genesis 1. It is a very old idea.

  10. #130
    Furry Critter with Claws Kiddo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    MBTI
    OMNi
    Posts
    2,790

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Owl View Post
    It is true that natural law was not very popular before the Enlightenment, but it was taught by Hobbes, Aquinas, and Aristotle. Indeed, Natural law theory appears in Genesis 1. It is a very old idea.
    Natural law is not the same thing as "innate human rights". Innate human rights were not conceived until the formation of liberal natural law theory. Calling the natural law that Aristotle taught the same as the "innate human rights" that were conceived during the Enlightenment is about the same as saying the first wheel was an automobile. There has been quite a bit of modification and addition to the ideas, but nobody in ancient Greece would have suggested concepts like a "social contract".
    Quote Originally Posted by Silently Honest View Post
    OMNi: Wisdom at the cost of Sanity.

Similar Threads

  1. Where can I find "The Man Who Loved Dickens"?
    By Red Herring in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-11-2010, 09:42 PM
  2. women who love makeup (and men, too!)
    By velocity in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 03-02-2010, 07:22 PM
  3. Am I the only one who LOVES reality TV??
    By CzeCze in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 12-24-2007, 01:23 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