ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 8th June 2017, 11:52 AM   #241
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 6,678
Originally Posted by Jodie View Post
I apologize if I made your condition seem trivial, it really wasn't my intent. I don't see it as "learned helplessness". I see it as a subconscious type of reaction to perceive something as a threat to your community based on a racial memory. As an example, focusing on police brutality as a form of oppression when the majority of homicides within the African American community are caused by black on black crime.

Now the same applies to the black students chanting, " black lives matter" in this particular situation. I didn't think it was the appropriate way to handle the situation. The entire problem was created at this university when they decided to segregate people to discuss the issue of racism. That is not a problem solved through segregation but through unification, being culturally sensitive to the damage done to a community, but also working towards healing and moving past those injuries. We all matter and 150 years out from legal slavery we haven't done the appropriate healing as a society.
No, no, I didn't take your posts to be demeaning to my experience; I only used it as to help distinguish the causes of PTSD and of the psychological concept of "learned helplessness."

Learned Helplessness is a thing, it seems to be legitimate and I believe more accurate description of what I think you're trying to say. PTSD has as one of the elements, a perception of extreme, life-threatening situations with a corresponding attempt at dealing with the helplessness of that situtation; these attempts may work at the moment, but over time, become maladaptive.

If you're surrounded by people who display coping mechanisms that are presented as normal to you, though they may be somewhat disfunctional, you can easily pick up on those mechanisms (i.e., behaviors) and carry them with you and potentially pass that down to younger generations or to others who self-identify with your group (that shares these similar coping mechanisms/strategies/behaviors).

For example: if you're walking along the sidewalk and someone from a higher caste walks past, you must step into the gutter to let them pass. It's not PTSD to take on the acts of stepping into the gutter when a higher caste person comes along; it's part of the social conditioning. You're doing what's expected or required of you, even if your dignity suffers or whatever. You may feel angry at having to do so ("they're no better than me! Why should I be the one to step aside?") but perhaps do it anyway. That could be thought more as learned helplessness (IMHO).

I think with the college, there are many conflicting social mores and no real way to help people navigate through them in a more healthy manner.




Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Then you were delusional, not traumatized.
Perhaps not delusional, but mistaken.
The Norseman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 12:00 PM   #242
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 62,897
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
OK, feelings are real, but they don't determine/define reality?

Say I decide, based on a feeling, whether to turn right or left. (Or keep betting for another roll of the dice.) Is what happens next real or not real?
I see you took my suggestion to not play games and threw it in the trash.

Have fun with that.
__________________
"So let it be written. So let it be done."
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 01:13 PM   #243
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 8,935
Steve Coffman

Originally Posted by Graham2001 View Post
A letter from a group of students at Evergreen that I found via this right-wing article.

http://freepdfhosting.com/840d72d60d.pdf

The article that linked to the letter is linked below:

https://heatst.com/culture-wars/lett...witch-hunting/

I recommend reading the letter before reading the article.
Steve Coffman, the author of an article at the College Fix linked above, is one of the signatories to the letter above.
__________________
“Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had
happened.” – Winston Churchill
Chris_Halkides is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 01:18 PM   #244
Joe Random
Graduate Poster
 
Joe Random's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,624
Originally Posted by Graham2001 View Post
A letter from a group of students at Evergreen that I found via this right-wing article.

http://freepdfhosting.com/840d72d60d.pdf

The article that linked to the letter is linked below:

https://heatst.com/culture-wars/lett...witch-hunting/

I recommend reading the letter before reading the article.

Admirable sentiments, but am I being too nit-picky to expect better grammar and composition from a college student? It wasn't horrible, but for something that you're putting out to the world I'd think you'd want it to positively shine. This read to me like a middling "B / B-" grade. Or maybe I'm biased against the lot of them after watching the Twitter vid of one of the protesters trying and failing to read a simple prepared statement (wish I could locate that again).

But beyond all that, good show for people speaking up with the voice of reason at that place. Honestly wonder why anyone possessing a relatively logical bent to their thinking would enroll there.
Joe Random is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 01:41 PM   #245
Eddie Dane
Philosopher
 
Eddie Dane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,795
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Does the same concept apply to Jewish people, Chinese people, First Nations, and both Irish & Scottish people in the US? A large portion of Irish & Scots in the US ended up here because England sent them over as "indentured servants" because of rebellion in Britain. Many Chinese people were severely mistreated, denied rights, and kept in extremely limited roles because of their ancestry and foreignness (there's a reason for Chinese Laundries and Restaurants being such a prevalent stereotype). And let's not even start on the abhorrent treatment of First Nations people time and again by the US government.

Basically, the US government has pretty much been total jerkwads to a ton of people over and over again.
My family had generations of poverty. My grandfather survived Auschwitz and the bombing of Rotterdam. My wife's grandfather survived the battle of Stalingrad on the German side.

My children are probably hard to kill in an urban environment, but none of us has some kind of historical trauma.
__________________
Kanye for president!
Eddie Dane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 05:13 PM   #246
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 7,785
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
I am angry. I am afraid.
My sibling is bipolar. She's often angry and/or afraid. That doesn't define reality though.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 05:14 PM   #247
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 7,785
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
There's only one reality, and it's the objective one. Don't play games.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 05:16 PM   #248
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 7,785
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
This makes me feel sad.

It makes me feel sad because the subject deserves more than the topic will allow. We've taken a tortuous path from Professor objects --> unsupported oppression --> PTSD and language redefinition --> culturally created facts --> whether or not feelings are real. I'm saddened because the thread drift can't support another extension.

I see two choices before me. In one I try to go down the rabbit hole and risk getting shut down without doing a good job of exploring the (new) topic. The other choice has me abandoning the segue altogether.

Those choices, and the behaviors they produce, are not subjective, but observable consequences of my feelings about how to proceed. How I feel now will determine what future state I will attempt to produce.

I feel sad.
Interesting, there is at least one other option! It's not a dichotomous situation, imagine that!

You could... you know... start a new thread in the appropriate location, with a quote and a link from here to seed it. No need to be sad at all.

See what can happen when you don't assume that feelings define reality?

(Also consider the difference between that statement and your suggestion that somehow that means feelings aren't real... )
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 05:18 PM   #249
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 7,785
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
OK, feelings are real, but they don't determine/define reality?

Say I decide, based on a feeling, whether to turn right or left. (Or keep betting for another roll of the dice.) Is what happens next real or not real?
Holy cow. Feelings <> Actions taken

Seriously marplots, this is basic stuff here. Please don't go all solipsist on us.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 06:02 PM   #250
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,980
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Holy cow. Feelings <> Actions taken

Seriously marplots, this is basic stuff here. Please don't go all solipsist on us.
Not all solipsist, just some. Are you really prepared to defend the thesis that we don't have feelings or that the actions we take cannot be predicated on those feelings? What a strange world that would be.

Here I thought I participated in the forum because the topics intrigued me, that I enjoyed discussing things with other people, and now I find out I'm just an emotionless bot? That makes me sad.

We aren't just throwing out cultural anthropology (and ideas about "cultural PTSD) with this meme, but psychology as well. Apparently, the students at Evergreen only feel they are depressed or triggered, or whatever, but it's not really real. Except that's not at all satisfying as an answer.

Maybe you can clear it up for me.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 06:35 PM   #251
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,444
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
OK, feelings are real, but they don't determine/define reality?

Say I decide, based on a feeling, whether to turn right or left. (Or keep betting for another roll of the dice.) Is what happens next real or not real?
Feelings define reality in a way that is trivially true: saying that you are sad is an objective statement about the state of your brain just like saying that a traffic light is red or green, and just like that traffic like that objective fact can influence other things about the world.

I think everyone understands this and it's not very interesting.

What isn't true is anything more than that trivial fact. Someone else feeling oppressed doesn't mean that they are being oppressed, it means that they feel oppressed. And those are two separate statements about the world. They often overlap because the feeling of oppression is usually caused by oppression, but there are other possible causes for that feeling which are unrelated to whether or not that oppression actually exists.

The same is true of offence. If I feel offended it's objectively true that I feel offended, but not necessarily that something offensive was done to me. A simple example is that I may have simply misheard something that was said to me.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov

Last edited by Roboramma; 8th June 2017 at 06:39 PM. Reason: to add a "necessarily" so as not to be misunderstood
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 06:57 PM   #252
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,980
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
Feelings define reality in a way that is trivially true: saying that you are sad is an objective statement about the state of your brain just like saying that a traffic light is red or green, and just like that traffic like that objective fact can influence other things about the world.

I think everyone understands this and it's not very interesting.
That's why I was surprised anyone would suggest otherwise - it seems like the normal state of affairs to me.

Quote:
What isn't true is anything more than that trivial fact. Someone else feeling oppressed doesn't mean that they are being oppressed, it means that they feel oppressed. And those are two separate statements about the world. They often overlap because the feeling of oppression is usually caused by oppression, but there are other possible causes for that feeling which are unrelated to whether or not that oppression actually exists.

The same is true of offence. If I feel offended it's objectively true that I feel offended, but not that something offensive was done to me. A simple example is that I may have simply misheard something that was said to me.
First, it's not trivial in most cases. A great deal of human relations depends on the mechanism (if not all). We quite often find, at the root of disputes - local all the way to international - a mismatch between judgements about oppression, status, and so on.

When you say "whether or not that oppression actually exists" and "but not that something offensive was done to me" you are trying to wedge an objective standard onto a subjective one. It doesn't work like that at all. How are you going to measure such a thing?
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 07:45 PM   #253
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,980
Here's a way to look at the issue (which conveniently puts us back on track for the thread).

If offense/oppression is going to have an objective standard we can point to, then why not simply point out the error the students are making? Case closed, problem solved. Surely they would agree just as soon as they saw where they went wrong...

Or not.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 07:52 PM   #254
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,444
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
That's why I was surprised anyone would suggest otherwise - it seems like the normal state of affairs to me.
Yeah, I find that odd as well, though I think they were responding to what seemed to be the spirit rather than the letter of your words. If you were only saying that it's objectively true that people have feelings that wouldn't be very interesting so they read your posts as actually saying something interesting. The problem being that the only interesting reading is also wrong.


Quote:
First, it's not trivial in most cases. A great deal of human relations depends on the mechanism (if not all). We quite often find, at the root of disputes - local all the way to international - a mismatch between judgements about oppression, status, and so on.
It's certainly true that people often misunderstand each other. That's not what I was calling trivial however. What's trivial is the fact that feelings exist. Feelings are real in the sense that people feel them. They affect the world through the mechanism of affecting the actions of the people who feel them. That's trivially true. What's not true is that other facts about the world are defined by what people feel about them.

Quote:
When you say "whether or not that oppression actually exists" and "but not that something offensive was done to me" you are trying to wedge an objective standard onto a subjective one. It doesn't work like that at all. How are you going to measure such a thing?
Oppression isn't defined by whether or not people feel that they are oppressed but rather by the limitations on their actions imposed by outside actors. If I have no power over you then are not oppressed by me. For instance, when a psychic tries to turn the page of a phone book with his mind and finds that James Randi's presence somehow seems to prevent him from doing so, he is not being oppressed by Randi's negative thoughts, even though he might feel that he is.

Of course I haven't completely defined oppression yet, I've given a necessary but not sufficient stipulation: that an individual or group has limitations imposed on their actions by others. There are plenty of ways in which such limitations can be imposed which would not be oppression, but certainly oppression can't exist without such impositions. And yet it's entirely possible to feel oppressed when such impositions are absent.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 07:57 PM   #255
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,444
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Here's a way to look at the issue (which conveniently puts us back on track for the thread).

If offense/oppression is going to have an objective standard we can point to, then why not simply point out the error the students are making? Case closed, problem solved. Surely they would agree just as soon as they saw where they went wrong...

Or not.
Because all people are both reasonable and well informed?

If climate change is going to have an objective standard we can point to, then why not simply point out the error climate change denialists are making? Case closed, problem solved. Surely they would agree just as soon as they saw where they went wrong...

If evolution is going have an objective standard we can point to, then why not simply point out the error creationists are making?

...

That people disagree about something doesn't show that disagreement is reasonable. The earth really is round, regardless of how many people choose to believe otherwise.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 08:04 PM   #256
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 37,546
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
When you say "whether or not that oppression actually exists" and "but not that something offensive was done to me" you are trying to wedge an objective standard onto a subjective one. It doesn't work like that at all. How are you going to measure such a thing?
It doesn't work like that?

But it MUST work like that, or there is no hope for any of us. Actual oppression can be remedied, and society should marshal resources to do so. That is fair and just. Imagined oppression cannot be remedied, and to marshal society's resources to tilt at those windmills is not fair or just, but disastrous and perverse.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 08:06 PM   #257
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 37,546
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
The earth really is round
...-ish.
</pedant>
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 08:27 PM   #258
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,980
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
Because all people are both reasonable and well informed?

If climate change is going to have an objective standard we can point to, then why not simply point out the error climate change denialists are making? Case closed, problem solved. Surely they would agree just as soon as they saw where they went wrong...

If evolution is going have an objective standard we can point to, then why not simply point out the error creationists are making?
Because, at some level of complexity we rely on shame and ridicule to do the job for us. We impose our standards of belief on the minority, exclude them where we can and disallow arguments to the contrary.

(Please note: the above is not about who is right, just about how we manage the trick of consensus.)
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 08:47 PM   #259
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,444
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Because, at some level of complexity we rely on shame and ridicule to do the job for us. We impose our standards of belief on the minority, exclude them where we can and disallow arguments to the contrary.

(Please note: the above is not about who is right, just about how we manage the trick of consensus.)
My point is that evolution is actually a correct description of real things. That some people disagree doesn't show that it's subjective. Do you disagree with that?

If so, you agree that some people disagreeing about something doesn't demonstrate that it's subjective. In which case your argument which states that the students at Evergreen don't agree with me therefore the truth is subjective is also not valid.

ETA to reply to what you wrote above: I don't think that's true at all. Yes, we humans do use emotional reasoning. We do attempt to shame and ridicule our opponents in ways that are unrelated to the truth value of their statements. I think that's something to be avoided and certainly isn't how we came to determine that certain groups were being oppressed.

I also think it's one of the major problems that we face today and not generally "how we manage the trick of consensus".
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov

Last edited by Roboramma; 8th June 2017 at 08:50 PM.
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 08:48 PM   #260
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,980
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
Oppression isn't defined by whether or not people feel that they are oppressed but rather by the limitations on their actions imposed by outside actors. If I have no power over you then are not oppressed by me.
What about situational oppression - perhaps by way of culture. In 1955 the first handicapped parking spaces appeared by way of legislation (in Delaware). In 1968 the feds passed the Architectural Barriers Act, which gave us spaces, signage and curb cuts. Were the disabled oppressed before that? Did it matter if they didn't feel oppressed?

Quote:
Of course I haven't completely defined oppression yet, I've given a necessary but not sufficient stipulation: that an individual or group has limitations imposed on their actions by others. There are plenty of ways in which such limitations can be imposed which would not be oppression, but certainly oppression can't exist without such impositions. And yet it's entirely possible to feel oppressed when such impositions are absent.
This sounds like you may not accept historical oppression as a "thing," since one presumes the actual impositions have disappeared. However, I don't want to put words in your post that aren't actually there.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 08:55 PM   #261
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 37,546
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
What about situational oppression - perhaps by way of culture. In 1955 the first handicapped parking spaces appeared by way of legislation (in Delaware). In 1968 the feds passed the Architectural Barriers Act, which gave us spaces, signage and curb cuts. Were the disabled oppressed before that?
People in wheelchairs were not oppressed before that. They were not accommodated, which they should be, and they were at severe disadvantages as a result, but it wasn't oppression.

Some people with mental handicaps were seriously oppressed, though. But that's really a different issue.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 09:02 PM   #262
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,444
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
What about situational oppression - perhaps by way of culture. In 1955 the first handicapped parking spaces appeared by way of legislation (in Delaware). In 1968 the feds passed the Architectural Barriers Act, which gave us spaces, signage and curb cuts. Were the disabled oppressed before that? Did it matter if they didn't feel oppressed?
I don't think that the disabled were oppressed, but I do think that it's good to do what we can to help them, and as a society making laws that enforce certain actions whose cost is not too high so that life for the disabled will be easier is very reasonable and good thing. It works very well in my generally utilitarian ethical framework.


Quote:
This sounds like you may not accept historical oppression as a "thing," since one presumes the actual impositions have disappeared. However, I don't want to put words in your post that aren't actually there.
Can you clarify what historical oppression is? I certainly accept that oppression existed in history. Generally speaking once those impositions have been removed then the group is no longer being oppressed, though some impositions being removed doesn't imply that there are no other impositions in existence.

For instance a legal framework (like segregation) that is oppressive can be removed and yet an oppressive cultural framework still remain, in the form of the racism of individuals who might choose not to hire people for a job based not on their ability but instead on their membership of a group (like the colour of their skin).

Oppression doesn't have to be overt to be objective. And it can certainly exist to varying degrees.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 09:12 PM   #263
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,980
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
My point is that evolution is actually a correct description of real things. That some people disagree doesn't show that it's subjective. Do you disagree with that?
Why are the proffered examples always taken from a consensus belief system; one that we both share? A better way to ask the question would be: "What would it take for me to believe evolution to be false?"

Quote:
If so, you agree that some people disagreeing about something doesn't demonstrate that it's subjective. In which case your argument which states that the students at Evergreen don't agree with me therefore the truth is subjective is also not valid.
I think you've added the word truth there unfairly. As with many subjective things there may be no external truth value to be had. I shall mirror the question I asked above - "What would it take to convince you you were wrong (for Evergreen)?"

Quote:
ETA to reply to what you wrote above: I don't think that's true at all. Yes, we humans do use emotional reasoning. We do attempt to shame and ridicule our opponents in ways that are unrelated to the truth value of their statements. I think that's something to be avoided and certainly isn't how we came to determine that certain groups were being oppressed.

I also think it's one of the major problems that we face today and not generally "how we manage the trick of consensus".
That's a good way forward in the discussion. How do we come to understand that certain groups are being oppressed, if "teh feelz" is off the table? Perhaps we can look at a historical example?
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 09:24 PM   #264
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,980
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
(much snipped)
Oppression isn't defined by whether or not people feel that they are oppressed but rather by the limitations on their actions imposed by outside actors. If I have no power over you then are not oppressed by me.
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
People in wheelchairs were not oppressed before that. They were not accommodated, which they should be, and they were at severe disadvantages as a result, but it wasn't oppression.

Some people with mental handicaps were seriously oppressed, though. But that's really a different issue.
I was trying to work with Roboramma's definition above.

To my mind this fit "the limitations on their actions imposed by outside actors." The example also had the element of "suddenly realizing I have been oppressed" when the culture changes around me.

MONSIEUR JOURDAIN: "Well, what do you know about that! These forty years now I’ve been speaking in prose without knowing it!"
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 09:55 PM   #265
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,444
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Why are the proffered examples always taken from a consensus belief system; one that we both share? A better way to ask the question would be: "What would it take for me to believe evolution to be false?"
Is it a consensus? Certainly among scientists, but I don't believe that evolution is a valid description because scientists agree about it, I believe it because I've reviewed the evidence for it and found it to be convincing. It's a little funny to use an authority to challenge the validity of authority but I like Feynman's "Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts".

Regarding "what would it take for me to believe evolution to be false?", that's a difficult question because there is already so much supporting it. Whatever new evidence arose to challenge it would have to also be consistent with the overwhelming evidence supporting it.

That said, the old "rabbits in the precambrian" idea is a valid one. If someone found those fossils I'd probably think that they'd made a mistake at first, but if that evidence was reviewed by others, held up to scrutiny, and was even reproduced in other finds, I'd find it convincing and strong reason to think that there is something else going on. I think any of my beliefs could be challenged by new evidence though some would require more than others.



Quote:
I think you've added the word truth there unfairly. As with many subjective things there may be no external truth value to be had. I shall mirror the question I asked above - "What would it take to convince you you were wrong (for Evergreen)?"
Wrong about which aspect? Regarding the philosophical disagreement that we seem be having it's hard for me to see a way forward (in changing my mind) about the nature of truth. That doesn't mean it can't happen, it just means that I can't think of an objective fact that could change my mind about this philosophical principle, and whatever philosophical argument could change my mind, if I could think of it my mind would have changed.

With respect to the question of whether or not the students of Evergreen are experiencing trauma passed on from their ancestors, I think that's certainly an empirical question that could be answered. The further question of if that trauma exists what the best way to deal with it is is also a valid empirical question.

I suppose I'll have to think more about what sort of results could potentially change my mind about both of those questions. IF you had a different question in my (like whether or not it's a good idea to enforce a day of absence for white students) then I can try to consider that as well. Again though, not knowing exactly what arguments or evidence would change my mind is different from my mind not being susceptible to change.

Whatever would change my mind I don't think that a consensus would do it.

Quote:
That's a good way forward in the discussion. How do we come to understand that certain groups are being oppressed, if "teh feelz" is off the table? Perhaps we can look at a historical example?
That sounds reasonable. It's going to be complicated of course. Further I don't think we are as far from each other as we might appear. I am something of a historical determinist in that I think most of history is determined by economics, geography, etc. I think oppression tended to end not when people made the right arguments but when there were good economic reasons for it. That doesn't impact upon whether or not those arguments were valid however, and the economic circumstances in which that oppression could be ended not having arisen doesn't suggest that the people living under it weren't being oppressed.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th June 2017, 09:57 PM   #266
Roboramma
Philosopher
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,444
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
I was trying to work with Roboramma's definition above.
It's worth noting again that I said my criterion was necessary but not sufficient for determining oppression.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2017, 03:54 AM   #267
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 37,546
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
I was trying to work with Roboramma's definition above.

To my mind this fit "the limitations on their actions imposed by outside actors."
It doesn't. The limitations of someone in a wheelchair are imposed by their physical handicap.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2017, 03:15 PM   #268
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 7,785
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Not all solipsist, just some. Are you really prepared to defend the thesis that we don't have feelings or that the actions we take cannot be predicated on those feelings? What a strange world that would be.
What's really strange is that nobody has suggest that.

Reality is not dependent on feelings. Reality isn't defined by feelings. You can't "feel" that gravity is wrong and suddenly start floating away. You can't "feel" that you're being oppressed and thereby turn everyone else into oppressors.

That doesn't imply in any way at all that feelings don't exist. It implies only that reality is independent of your feelings about it.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2017, 03:24 PM   #269
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 7,785
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
Yeah, I find that odd as well, though I think they were responding to what seemed to be the spirit rather than the letter of your words. If you were only saying that it's objectively true that people have feelings that wouldn't be very interesting so they read your posts as actually saying something interesting. The problem being that the only interesting reading is also wrong.
Nah, I don't think it was a wrong reading. Pretty sure marplots just wants to play around in the field of what "is" means. It seemed pretty clear that he was actually taking the route that he actually took...
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Okay then. I feel offended, therefore you're being offensive?
Yes.
Feelings define reality, then.
Sometimes, yes.
Oh, this should be good: when?
I am angry. I am afraid.
That's funny, because neither of those things define objective reality. Because you're afraid, for instance, doesn't mean there's a real danger present.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2017, 05:12 PM   #270
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 28,980
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
What's really strange is that nobody has suggest that.

Reality is not dependent on feelings. Reality isn't defined by feelings. You can't "feel" that gravity is wrong and suddenly start floating away. You can't "feel" that you're being oppressed and thereby turn everyone else into oppressors.

That doesn't imply in any way at all that feelings don't exist. It implies only that reality is independent of your feelings about it.
That's some confused thinking. Here, I'll break it down for you:
1) Reality is that which exists
2) Feelings exist
3) Feelings are just a part of reality like any other - same as that ham sandwich over there.

Also, I hope no one finds this offensive. Even if offensive isn't real.

Last edited by marplots; 9th June 2017 at 05:15 PM.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2017, 06:14 PM   #271
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 37,546
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
That's some confused thinking. Here, I'll break it down for you:
1) Reality is that which exists
2) Feelings exist
3) Feelings are just a part of reality like any other - same as that ham sandwich over there.

Also, I hope no one finds this offensive. Even if offensive isn't real.
Nobody disputes that feelings exist. But society has no obligation to protect feelings.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2017, 09:57 PM   #272
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 43,196
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Nobody disputes that feelings exist. But society has no obligation to protect feelings.
What are society's obligations? I'd say the health and happiness of its people. So yeah, people's feelings do come into play. If you think society doesn't care about people's feelings, try desecrating a grave some time and see what happens.
__________________
One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2017, 05:50 PM   #273
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 37,546
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
What are society's obligations? I'd say the health and happiness of its people.
No. No, no, no, no, no. A thousand times no.

Nobody is responsible for anyone's happiness other than their own. Trying to make people responsible for someone's happiness never works. You cannot make people happy. Trying to is basically rewarding them for being unhappy. And when you reward people for being unhappy, what exactly do you expect will happen? It's a perverse incentive, and it will create perverse results.

Quote:
If you think society doesn't care about people's feelings, try desecrating a grave some time and see what happens.
I didn't say that society shouldn't care. I'm saying it's not an obligation. Furthermore, note that the laws which prohibit and punish such an action don't depend on feelings, even if feelings are the reason for their existence.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2017, 08:52 PM   #274
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 43,196
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
No. No, no, no, no, no. A thousand times no.
Yes, yes, yes, a billion times yes. What is the point of even existing if we can't be happy? Society exists so that the individuals within it can exist and be happy. If society only preserved our lives but made us miserable we'd be better off without society--or life itself.

Quote:
Nobody is responsible for anyone's happiness other than their own. Trying to make people responsible for someone's happiness never works. You cannot make people happy. Trying to is basically rewarding them for being unhappy. And when you reward people for being unhappy, what exactly do you expect will happen? It's a perverse incentive, and it will create perverse results.
Do you ever stop jumping to conclusions, reading things in that aren't there, or constructing strawmen to attack? I never said anything about making people happy, or being responsible for their happiness. We built civilization to create the opportunity for happiness.

As for the rest of that drivel, you have a peculiarly disgusting mind and a terrible view of humanity. I advise you to seek spiritual help.

Quote:
I didn't say that society shouldn't care. I'm saying it's not an obligation. Furthermore, note that the laws which prohibit and punish such an action don't depend on feelings, even if feelings are the reason for their existence.
You have a peculiar notion of casuality as well if you think things exist independent of their causes. We write laws because of our desires. Either to do something, or stop something from being done. Laws absolutely depend upon our feelings because we create them when we feel like it to do things we feel we want to have done, and we change or remove laws when we feel we aren't happy with the results.

It seems a disease among self-proclaimed sceptics that they want to pretend to be above having feelings. Well, guess what? You're not. Feelings are the reason we do pretty much everything, ever. And no, they don't make rational sense. Guess what else doesn't make rational sense? Existence. We are irrational beings. Get over it!
__________________
One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2017, 10:24 PM   #275
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,164
I think the whole Evergreen saga is a great preview of how first world nations are going to increasingly slip into disorder, chaos and bickering (then increasingly violence) between distinct groups within them as an inevitable result of having made the choice to embrace multiracialism, multiculturalism and egalitarianism.

It will all fall apart. Clown world.
__________________
"Nothing is more certainly written in the book of fate than that these people are to be free. Nor is it less certain that the two races, equally free, cannot live in the same government. Nature, habit, opinion has drawn indelible lines of distinction between them." - Thomas Jefferson
Reality is going to force you to become me.
Skeptic Tank is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2017, 02:00 AM   #276
baron
Illuminator
 
baron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,832
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
No. No, no, no, no, no. A thousand times no.

Nobody is responsible for anyone's happiness other than their own.
A very Buddhist view. I concur.
__________________
I'm sorry, the fish is awful.
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2017, 06:14 AM   #277
Graham2001
Graduate Poster
 
Graham2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,100
I am begging to wonder if Evergreen College used this course featured in this video by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EbQfmVoOfM

If you think that is too long, they have a shorter video covering five incidents (2 Left wing victims / 3 Right wing victims).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yS6IA93o79s
__________________
"I need hard facts! Bring in the dowsers!"
'America Unearthed' Season 1, Episode 13: Hunt for the Holy Grail

Everybody gets it wrong sometimes...
Graham2001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2017, 08:28 AM   #278
CaptainHowdy
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 359
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
I think the whole Evergreen saga is a great preview of how first world nations are going to increasingly slip into disorder, chaos and bickering (then increasingly violence) between distinct groups within them as an inevitable result of having made the choice to embrace multiracialism, multiculturalism and egalitarianism.

It will all fall apart. Clown world.
You can't say that! That's hate speech!!
CaptainHowdy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2017, 11:54 AM   #279
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 62,897
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
No. No, no, no, no, no. A thousand times no.

Nobody is responsible for anyone's happiness other than their own.
Well, I'd say that government can indeed be used to try to bring about a level playing field for people to choose their own path to success and happiness. However, that's not like protecting someone's feelings.

It's more like the difference between:

- I'm afraid!
- There, there. If you're afraid, then the thing you're afraid of is scary and should be stopped!

And:

- I'm afraid!
- There, there. There is no reason to be afraid, and here's why.

I'd think a reasonable government would do the latter, not the former.
__________________
"So let it be written. So let it be done."
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2017, 11:58 AM   #280
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 62,897
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
What is the point of even existing if we can't be happy?
Setting aside that this doesn't address Ziggurat's point and is irrelevant to it, I can think of a few points to existing besides being happy. Reproduction, for instance. That might not be your cup of tea, or mine, but it can be a point. In fact it's the point for almost every living thing on earth, bar ourselves.

Quote:
Society exists so that the individuals within it can exist and be happy.
No, society exists to maximise our odds of survival. More recently, to increase our productivity and potential.

Although a specific society could be created with happiness in mind, it is by no means inherent to the idea of society.
__________________
"So let it be written. So let it be done."
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:51 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.