Stereotyping and Mbti Typing

[Tennessee Jed]

Don't tell me, I would never have guessed: 'I have a bad attitude'. Good God, I am a walking cliche, indeed a walking caricature.

But I am afraid your price for being taken seriously is too high.

You play the jester, you play the fool dressed in motley, but then you work yourself into a hissy fit if anyone dares laugh at you. It's all so very passive-aggressive.

Oh well, like I said: I'm not looking for an argument. I'll bow out and leave you to pronounce the final word.

 

[Mole]

You play the jester, you play the fool dressed in motley, but then you work yourself into a hissy fit if anyone dares laugh at you. It's all so very passive-aggressive.

Oh well, like I said: I'm not looking for an argument. I'll bow out and leave you to pronounce the final word.

Thank you, I will take the final word as befits, not only a cliche and a caricature, who is passive-aggressive, but also works himself into a hissy fit if anyone dares laugh at him.

And it is interesting how in a site devoted to personality, we feel free to make personal insults, rather than address the issues.

 

[anticlimatic]

All action begins with thought, so all action begins in our psyche, so a moral psyche begets moral action.

And it is even deeper than that as we don't do anything without meaning, so all action begins with meaning.

And some meanings are moral and some are immoral, just as some actions are moral and some immoral.

I forgot morality is relative for a second there. Per my own, I find any deliberate stifling or censoring of one's thoughts to be a moral violation of the human functional imperative: discovery; progress.

 

[Mole]

I forgot morality is relative for a second there. Per my own, I find any deliberate stifling or censoring of one's thoughts to be a moral violation of the human functional imperative: discovery; progress.

Perhaps if you will read The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, you will discover morality is not relative.

Propagandists who say morality is relative are opposed to The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and wish to continue to violate the rights of women and children, gays and lesbians, apostates, Jews, Christians, and Infidels.

Yes, it is the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation comprising 57 States:

Africa

Algeria
Benin
Burkina Faso
Cameroon
Comoros
Chad
Djibouti
Egypt
Gabon
Gambia
Guinea-Bissau
Guinea
Ivory Coast
Libya
Mali
Mauritania
Morocco
Mozambique
Niger
Nigeria
Senegal
Sierra Leone
Somalia
Sudan
Togo
Tunisia
Uganda

Asia

Afghanistan
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Brunei
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Lebanon
Malaysia
Maldives
Oman
Pakistan
Palestine
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
Syria
Tajikistan
Turkmenistan
United Arab Emirates
Uzbekistan
Yemen

Europe

Albania
Azerbaijan
Turkey

South America

Guyana
Suriname

who reject The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in favour of Sharia Law, and who propagandise that morality is relative.

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation is joined by the Marxist Left who propagandise that Capitalist morality is bourgeois, and so say morality is relative.

 

[Forever]

I agree completely. Are not men taller than women? Do women not have larger breasts than men?

There are tall women..
Well... considering that it's mostly fat...

 

[anticlimatic]

Perhaps if you will read The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, you will discover morality is not relative.

Propagandists who say morality is relative are opposed to The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and wish to continue to violate the rights of women and children, gays and lesbians, apostates, Jews, Christians, and Infidels.

Yes, it is the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation comprising 57 States:

who reject The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in favour of Sharia Law, and who propagandise that morality is relative.

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation is joined by the Marxist Left who propagandise that Capitalist morality is bourgeois, and so say morality is relative.

The fact that morality is relative doesn't mandate moral relativism as a philosophy. If anything it's an encouragement to identify and fight for moral angles that benefit mankind the most...and I don't think a war on thoughtcrime is in mankind's best interest. After all, how can one tell right from wrong if one can't imagine wrong?

From your link:

The second column (articles 12–17) constitutes the rights of the individual in civil and political society (including such things as freedom of movement). The third column (articles 18–21) is concerned with spiritual, public, and political freedoms such as freedom of association, thought, conscience, and religion.

Freedom of thought... is the matrix, the indispensable condition, of nearly every other form of freedom. With rare aberrations a pervasive recognition of this truth can be traced in our history, political and legal.

Freedom of thought - Wikipedia

 

[Litsnob]

Stereotypes exist for a reason. They are based on patterns and humans are pattern recognising creatures. It's not immoral, it's merely fallible. It can also be somewhat accurate. Categorising things helps us to understand them though we may make categorization errors. Clinging to stereotypes in the face of better evidence might perhaps be immoral. Relativism might perhaps be immoral too. How we choose to act has more relation to morality than the actual stereotype.

Let's take a really contentious one "Black people are usually criminals". A stereotype to be sure. It may or may not be statistically true but it's immoral to judge every black person based on it. We can do better than that.

 

[Mole]

Stereotypes exist for a reason. They are based on patterns and humans are pattern recognising creatures. It's not immoral, it's merely fallible. It can also be somewhat accurate. Categorising things helps us to understand them though we may make categorization errors. Clinging to stereotypes in the face of better evidence might perhaps be immoral. Relativism might perhaps be immoral too. How we choose to act has more relation to morality than the actual stereotype.

Let's take a really contentious one "Black people are usually criminals". A stereotype to be sure. It may or may not be statistically true but it's immoral to judge every black person based on it. We can do better than that.

As I write we are making a determined attempt to stop child marriage, and the infibulation of girls. This is made more difficult by those who believe all cultures are equal and believe in cultural relativism.

 

[Mole]

Let's take a really contentious one "Black people are usually criminals". A stereotype to be sure. It may or may not be statistically true but it's immoral to judge every black person based on it. We can do better than that.

After 300 years of institutional slavery, including sexual slavery, stereotypes of African Americans may well be in bad faith.

 

[Litsnob]

As I write we are making a determined attempt to stop child marriage, and the infibulation of girls. This is made more difficult by those who believe all cultures are equal and believe in cultural relativism.

Cultural relativism is possibly my most frequent criticism of leftist politics even though most people would identify me as a lefty. Left and right in politics are actually relative. LOL

 

[that's not my name]

Humans did not evolve to live in such big groups, its hard for us to keep track of more than a couple hundred unique people therefore comparmentalising based on behavioral characteristics helps us organize our thoughts and not get overwhelmed by having to remember tons of small details we are not designed to.

 

[Mole]

Cultural relativism is possibly my most frequent criticism of leftist politics even though most people would identify me as a lefty. Left and right in politics are actually relative. LOL

Unfortunately the Left have made an historic mistake by allying themselves with Islam. Islam is theist and the Left are largely agnostic or atheist. So they are very strange bedfellows.

For instance, our left wing government of the State of Victoria in Australia have put up huge billboards of two little girls in hijabs. It is supposed to be inclusive but instead it sexualises two little girls, and symbolises the inferior position of women.

 

[Litsnob]

Unfortunately the Left have made an historic mistake by allying themselves with Islam. Islam is theist and the Left are largely agnostic or atheist. So they are very strange bedfellows.

For instance, our left wing government of the State of Victoria in Australia have put up huge billboards of two little girls in hijabs. It is supposed to be inclusive but instead it sexualises two little girls, and symbolises the inferior position of women.

I am with you on this one. Though most people who know me would readily identify me as a lefty, and probably in most ways I am, I am also an anti-theist atheist so to my thinking all religion is more negative than positive and while I will argue that many Muslims are liberal themselves just as many Christians are, it's all a matter of cherry picking their holy books and not being fundamentalists. At the moment Islamic fundamentalists are a bit scarier than Christian ones are. I see hijabs as an unfortunate choice which symbolise the inferior position of women, as you say. I see the full face coverings and full body coverings as oppression so deep that some women born into that culture will side with their oppressors. Better the literal devil you know. To instantly strip a woman of this garment would be abusive and cruel but I see no benefit to condoning it and making room for it in a liberal society. The women are victims who need empathy and support but they are definitely victims and not empowered.