Philosophy Now Forum

Inherent bias can easily be overcome by intentional unbias.

RCSaunders wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 9:20 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 4:49 pm There are two basic types of racism; negative and positive.[/b]

Negative racism holds that other races than your own are inferior, or in some way problematic.
Poistive racism holds a position that your own race is more important to you than other races, and that you ought to promote the interests of your race.

I am here to tell you that these distinct types are EXACTLY the same thing.
And that until we stop categorising people by race, racism will persist to the long term detriment of human kind.

I think that is the first correct thing about racism I've seen on this entire thread. Very well and succinctly stated.

I'd only add any evaluation of anyone, positive or negative, based on any classification or categorization determined by genetics or culture beyond one's control (any ethnic or genetic attribute one does not choose like sex, country of birth, or economic background) is the same kind of irrational prejudice as racism.

If one must judge others, (almost always a mistake), only judgements based on an individual's actual observable overt actions (not claims, associations, or reputation) are valid. Everything else is prejudice or psychologizing.

Thanks.
I regard all racism as a dangerous form of vanity. And that goes especially for positive racism which can masquerade as patriotism, nationalism and other forms of exceptionalism justifying heinous acts against others.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 11:49 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 11:32 pm Very. Point to the "systemic" element in that verse. It's not there.

Non-righteousness is "innate propensity" (in your words); or inherent to humans.

"Inherent" is not "systemic." "Inherent" means "already in (a person or person) or "inborn."

"Systemic" refers to something "in a system, institution, or organization," but not necessarily in any of the particular people with that system. In other words, not necessarily "inherent".

SJW's think you can be "racist" without even personally having any "racist" views. They think what makes you a "racist" is being in or contributing to any system, organization or environment that is "systemically oppressive," or "unjust" in any way.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Thu Feb 03, 2022 11:32 pm A man is a racist not merely for living within a "racist system," but only if he personally and consciously embraces racism as an ideology and practices it himself. If he doe snot, he's not a "racist" by any classical defintion, no matter if he happens to live in an area where racist attitudes are routine.

Blah blah blah.

Nope.

That's the truth. You don't personally have to have any "racist" attitudes for the SJW's to regard you as a "racist." For example, if you were a policeman, you would be "racist" just by wearing that uniform, according to them, even if you were friends with people of all "races." Any policeman is, by their reckoning, a functionary in the "racist system" of policing. It doesn't matter how open-minded you personally are.

And if you were black yourself, they'd call you "complicit," say you had "internalized your oppression" and were a "race traitor." (Those are, of course, all their terms.)

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Feb 04, 2022 3:01 pm "Inherent" is not "systemic." "Inherent" means "already in (a person or person) or "inborn."

They are synonymous. Dork.

A systemic problem is a problem which is a consequence of issues inherent in the overall system

In so far as your brain functions in a particular way outside of your self-awareness or control your biases are systemic/inherent.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Feb 04, 2022 3:01 pm "Systemic" refers to something "in a system, institution, or organization," but not necessarily in any of the particular people with that system. In other words, not necessarily "inherent".

SJW's think you can be "racist" without even personally having any "racist" views. They think what makes you a "racist" is being in or contributing to any system, organization or environment that is "systemically oppressive," or "unjust" in any way.

Yes, dork. There are different levels of systems. Your body - as a system. Your family - as a system. Your society - as a system.

Surely you understand the interaction between the higher and lower levels of abstraction when we are dealing with systems of systems?

Individual biases become systemic biases if particularly racist individuals pass particularly racist law.
Systemic biases become individual biases when particularly non-racist individuals blindly accept particularly racist social norms.

Christians who believe it is God's will that white and black folk shouldn't mix pass laws against it.
Citizens with no particular views on racism either way live under those laws and enforce them; or they benefit from the system in other ways enough to turn a blind eye to them.

Neutral views with respect to racism + adherence to racist social norms = racist behavior
Anti-racist views with respect to racism + adherence to racist social norms = racist behavior
Racist views + adherehce to racist social norms = racist behavior

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Feb 04, 2022 3:01 pm That's the truth. You don't personally have to have any "racist" attitudes for the SJW's to regard you as a "racist." For example, if you were a policeman, you would be "racist" just by wearing that uniform, according to them, even if you were friends with people of all "races." Any policeman is, by their reckoning, a functionary in the "racist system" of policing. It doesn't matter how open-minded you personally are.

And if you were black yourself, they'd call you "complicit," say you had "internalized your oppression" and were a "race traitor." (Those are, of course, all their terms.)

And they would be right!

Because ANY inherent (pro, anti or neutral) view on racism + failing to check my biases == racist behavior.

My wife constantly observes that I "tense up" and I become more vigilant, stern and observant when a group of black men is approaching us on the street at night, then when a group of white men are approaching us. This is my automatic response - it's not volitional.

My wife is black. I have a caramel baby boy. And I am a racist. My wife is a racist. And my kid too will grow up a racist. But hopefully a lesser racist than his parents.

See... I actually understand "original sin" (systemic issues) way better than you do.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 8:00 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Feb 04, 2022 3:01 pm "Inherent" is not "systemic." "Inherent" means "already in (a person or person) or "inborn."

They are synonymous. Dork.

A systemic problem is a problem which is a consequence of issues inherent in the overall system

In so far as your brain functions in a particular way outside of your self-awareness or control your biases are systemic/inherent.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Feb 04, 2022 3:01 pm "Systemic" refers to something "in a system, institution, or organization," but not necessarily in any of the particular people with that system. In other words, not necessarily "inherent".

SJW's think you can be "racist" without even personally having any "racist" views. They think what makes you a "racist" is being in or contributing to any system, organization or environment that is "systemically oppressive," or "unjust" in any way.

Yes, dork. There are different levels of systems. Your body - as a system. Your family - as a system. Your society - as a system.

Surely you understand the interaction between the higher and lower levels of abstraction when we are dealing with systems of systems?

Individual biases become systemic biases if particularly racist individuals pass particularly racist law.
Systemic biases become individual biases when particularly non-racist individuals blindly accept particularly racist social norms.

Christians who believe it is God's will that white and black folk shouldn't mix pass laws against it.
Citizens with no particular views on racism either way live under those laws and enforce them; or they benefit from the system in other ways enough to turn a blind eye to them.

Neutral views with respect to racism + adherence to racist social norms = racist behavior
Anti-racist views with respect to racism + adherence to racist social norms = racist behavior
Racist views + adherehce to racist social norms = racist behavior

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Feb 04, 2022 3:01 pm That's the truth. You don't personally have to have any "racist" attitudes for the SJW's to regard you as a "racist." For example, if you were a policeman, you would be "racist" just by wearing that uniform, according to them, even if you were friends with people of all "races." Any policeman is, by their reckoning, a functionary in the "racist system" of policing. It doesn't matter how open-minded you personally are.

And if you were black yourself, they'd call you "complicit," say you had "internalized your oppression" and were a "race traitor." (Those are, of course, all their terms.)

And they would be right!

Because ANY inherent (pro, anti or neutral) view on racism + failing to check my biases == racist behavior.

My wife constantly observes that I "tense up" and I become more vigilant, stern and observant when a group of black men is approaching us on the street at night, then when a group of white men are approaching us. This is my automatic response - it's not volitional.

My wife is black. I have a caramel baby boy. And I am a racist. My wife is a racist. And my kid too will grow up a racist. But hopefully a lesser racist than his parents.

See... I actually understand "original sin" (systemic issues) way better than you do.

In view of allegations of police corruption by a culture of brutal misogyny and alienation from other comparatively powerless demographics, you may be on a steep learning curve as to which demographics are the most dangerous to brown or black people, and to women.

Belinda wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 1:44 pm In view of allegations of police corruption by a culture of brutal misogyny and alienation from other comparatively powerless demographics, you may be on a steep learning curve as to which demographics are the most dangerous to brown or black people, and to women.

I can believe all of that. I have lost many friends since I have started being a "leftwind shill". Ironically, by men so toxic they don't recognise themselves as being part of the problem. My "friends" just didn't like being called out for acting like jerks.

The comparative analysis is an anti-debate tactic - it's whataboutism. Somebody is much worse than me so I don't have to change.

All that I can do is recognise whether my behaviour is part of the problem and adjust accordingly.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 1:59 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 1:44 pm In view of allegations of police corruption by a culture of brutal misogyny and alienation from other comparatively powerless demographics, you may be on a steep learning curve as to which demographics are the most dangerous to brown or black people, and to women.

I can believe all of that. I have lost many friends since I have started being a "leftwind shill". Ironically, by men so toxic they don't recognise themselves as being part of the problem. My "friends" just didn't like being called out for acting like jerks.

The comparative analysis is an anti-debate tactic - it's whataboutism. Somebody is much worse than me so I don't have to change.

All that I can do is recognise whether my behaviour is part of the problem and adjust accordingly.

There is also a lot to said for shouting out loud about nice people, good ideas, and good behaviour, and these need to be contrasted with the bad people, bad ideas, and bad behaviour. Jesus and Socrates reportedly also lost a lot of friends.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 8:00 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Feb 04, 2022 3:01 pm "Inherent" is not "systemic." "Inherent" means "already in (a person or person) or "inborn."

They are synonymous.

Nope, they are not. Sorry.

In so far as your brain functions in a particular way outside of your self-awareness or control your biases are systemic/inherent.

In Woke-talk, "system" does not refer to your internal "system." What you are is, according to them, nothing other than a product of your "situatedness" in society -- your racial, gender, cultural, etc. "situation." What they mean by "system" is the institutional and societal arrangements and the political apparatus around you...that's where they think the "racism" is. It's "institutionalized," meaning fixed by the social arrangments around us.

If you don't understand that claim, you don't know what they mean when they talk of "systemic racism." You only know about classical "racism."

Individual biases become systemic biases if particularly racist individuals pass particularly racist law.

That might be true: but the SJW's don't want to tell the story that way. The way you're telling it, individuals are ultimately responsible for racism. They could be located, blamed and stopped. And SJW's at all costs, do not want that to happen. They want the "racism" they talk about to be perpetual, unlocatable, "out there," and not preventable by pillorying one individual. They want it "systemic," not "personal."

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Fri Feb 04, 2022 3:01 pm That's the truth. You don't personally have to have any "racist" attitudes for the SJW's to regard you as a "racist." For example, if you were a policeman, you would be "racist" just by wearing that uniform, according to them, even if you were friends with people of all "races." Any policeman is, by their reckoning, a functionary in the "racist system" of policing. It doesn't matter how open-minded you personally are.

And if you were black yourself, they'd call you "complicit," say you had "internalized your oppression" and were a "race traitor." (Those are, of course, all their terms.)

And they would be right!

No, they would be silly.

Because if you're not a racist, then being a police officer doesn't make you one. Maybe it only makes you a person with a high concern for order and security. You mignt well be a black man who, like a Thomas Sowell or a Larry Elder, has a high degree of concern for his own community, and a desire to see them freed from gangs, drugs and poverty. Being like that has nothing to do with being a "racist"; it's actually the opposite.

The real racists are, as Morgan Freeman has to poignantly pointed out, those who keep wanting to make every policy decision based on "race": the SJW's themselves.

My wife is black. I have a caramel baby boy. And I am a racist. My wife is a racist. And my kid too will grow up a racist. But hopefully a lesser racist than his parents.

You're being defensive. That's what the SJW's want. They want you to protest your innocence, when actually they have no justification at all in calling you a racist.

Refuse their framing, is my advice. Laugh at their stupidity and veniality -- there's lots to laugh about there. And then go on with your life. You're not a racist, and they have no business calling you, or me, one.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 2:49 pm Nope, they are not. Sorry.

Just because you can't see it it doesn't mean it's not true.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 2:49 pm In Woke-talk, "system" does not refer to your internal "system.

The internal/external distinction is just muddying the water. We are talking about causality.

Social norms affect your behaviour.
Brain wiring affects your behaviour.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 2:49 pm " What you are is, according to them, nothing other than a product of your "situatedness" in society -- your racial, gender, cultural, etc. "situation." What they mean by "system" is the institutional and societal arrangements and the political apparatus around you...that's where they think the "racism" is. It's "institutionalized," meaning fixed by the social arrangments around us.

Yes! And that is precisely what I am pointing out to you. "The system" is that which influences your behaviour.

Which is both nature - your innate biases; AND nurture - the social norms you were brought up with.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 2:49 pm If you don't understand that claim, you don't know what they mean when they talk of "systemic racism." You only know about classical "racism."

It's because I understand and you don't is why I am explaining it to you.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 2:49 pm That might be true: but the SJW's don't want to tell the story that way. The way you're telling it, individuals are ultimately responsible for racism. They could be located, blamed and stopped. And SJW's at all costs, do not want that to happen. They want the "racism" they talk about to be perpetual, unlocatable, "out there," and not preventable by pillorying one individual. They want it "systemic," not "personal."

You seem to be confusing the cause with the mitigation. The cause of the systemic racism may be one single racist. In history. The racist who passed the racist law that all of us are now obeying/enforcing. Or the guy who wrote the homophobic verse in the Bible.

They are long dead now, but we are stuck with their legacy - there is no one single location where you can just turn it off.

Sorta like there's no one single place where you can turn off COVID. Ideas spread like viruses.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 2:49 pm No, they would be silly.

Because if you're not a racist, then being a police officer doesn't make you one.

Non-racist person + ( enforcing racist laws OR practicing racist social norms) = racist behavior.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 2:49 pm You're being defensive. That's what the SJW's want. They want you to protest your innocence, when actually they have no justification at all in calling you a racist.

You are shitty spokesperson for both SJWs and Christians. They absolutely have a justification for calling me a racist - I have original sin.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 2:49 pm Refuse their framing, is my advice. Laugh at their stupidity and veniality -- there's lots to laugh about there. And then go on with your life. You're not a racist, and they have no business calling you, or me, one.

Now make that exact argument against Christians accusing us of being sinners.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 9:57 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 2:49 pm Nope, they are not. Sorry.

Just because you can't see it it doesn't mean it's not true.

I can see what you're trying to say. It's just wrong.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 2:49 pm In Woke-talk, "system" does not refer to your internal "system.

The internal/external distinction is just muddying the water.

Not at all. It's as basic as the nature-nurture distinction, or the instinctive-environmental distinction.

Social norms affect your behaviour.
Brain wiring affects your behaviour.

Your expectations "affect" your behavior. What you had for dinner also "affects" your behaviour. The gravitational field of the globe "affects" your behaviour. So those two claims tell us nothing: "affects" is far too vague.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 2:49 pm " What you are is, according to them, nothing other than a product of your "situatedness" in society -- your racial, gender, cultural, etc. "situation." What they mean by "system" is the institutional and societal arrangements and the political apparatus around you...that's where they think the "racism" is. It's "institutionalized," meaning fixed by the social arrangments around us.

Yes! And that is precisely what I am pointing out to you. "The system" is that which influences your behaviour.

"Influences" is vague. You've said essentially nothing there. I also "influence" your behaviour, just by writing this: so you're not going to go on to say I "determine" it, are you?

SJW's believe that the institutional environment not only "affects" or "influences" your behaviour; nobody questions that. Rather, they think it determines it. What's more, they think that the collective social "environment" also determines your moral status. You are as "bad" or "good" as your alleged identity group is.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sat Feb 05, 2022 2:49 pm That might be true: but the SJW's don't want to tell the story that way. The way you're telling it, individuals are ultimately responsible for racism. They could be located, blamed and stopped. And SJW's at all costs, do not want that to happen. They want the "racism" they talk about to be perpetual, unlocatable, "out there," and not preventable by pillorying one individual. They want it "systemic," not "personal."

You seem to be confusing the cause with the mitigation.

No, they are. I'm describing what they think, not what I think. And they won't "mitigate" you for being white: you're guilty just for having a pale skin. You're complicit in what they call "whiteness," according to them, and you benefit from "white privilege," which makes you evil, even if you had the same personal views as MLK yourself.

Non-racist person + ( enforcing racist laws OR practicing racist social norms) = racist behavior.

They won't even give you that much credit. They'll say that even being a police officer makes you "complicit in racism." But as a matter of fact, your claim is simply not true.

A person can enforce a law as an officer of the law, even if he has no personal stake in the matter at all. He might even not approve of the law. In fact, that's the sort of detachment we demand of a good justice officer...to enforce whatever the people have decided is the law, not to go off based on his own opinions or inclinations.

They absolutely have a justification for calling me a racist - I have original sin.

If you say you're a racist, then who I am to argue with you? I don't claim to know more about you than you do. Perhaps I spoke on your behalf too soon...but if so, you should do something about that.

But as for original sin, I think you misunderstand the concept. Original sin refers to the propensity for sin, which is innate. But a propensity is not the same as the deed. A person is a sinner two ways: because of what he desires to do, and because of what he does with that desire. Both are sin.

There probably isn't anything better empirically established on Earth than the human propensity to sin. If your particular sin is racism, then that's only because you were already inclined to sin, as all are. If it had not been racism, it would have been lying, abusiveness or theft: your nature would have found some expression. However, it's not guaranteed to involve racism in all cases.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm I can see what you're trying to say. It's just wrong.

It sure sounds like you are claiming that I am committing a systemic error.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm Not at all. It's as basic as the nature-nurture distinction, or the instinctive-environmental distinction.

You are tripping over the connectives.

What influences your behavior is not nature OR nurture. It's nature AND nurture.
What influences your behavior isn't internal OR external factors. It's internal AND external factors.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm Your expectations "affect" your behavior. What you had for dinner also "affects" your behaviour. The gravitational field of the globe "affects" your behaviour. So those two claims tell us nothing: "affects" is far too vague.

You seem to be saying that one's behavior is a product of many factors.

It is so bizzare that you are agreeing with me while you continue to pretend that you are disagreeing with me.

A systemic problem is a problem which is a consequence of issues inherent in the overall system rather than due to a specific, individual, isolated factor.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm "Influences" is vague. You've said essentially nothing there. I also "influence" your behaviour, just by writing this: so you're not going to go on to say I "determine" it, are you?

It's not vague! You literally just listed multiple factors (by no means an exhaustive list) which determine a person's behavior!

You don't determine it - the multiple factors determine it. That is why it's called a systemic problem!

A systemic problem is a problem which is a consequence of issues inherent in the overall system rather than due to a specific, individual, isolated factor.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm SJW's believe that the institutional environment not only "affects" or "influences" your behaviour; nobody questions that. Rather, they think it determines it. What's more, they think that the collective social "environment" also determines your moral status. You are as "bad" or "good" as your alleged identity group is.

Obviously it determines it! If you were raised in a culture that taught you that murder is good and you fail to question that lesson, and practice that social norm - going around murdering people.

Where does that leave you with respect to your moral status? Are you the morally good murderer now?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm No, they are. I'm describing what they think, not what I think. And they won't "mitigate" you for being white: you're guilty just for having a pale skin.

No different to Christianity - I am guilty of sin just for being born.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm You're complicit in what they call "whiteness," according to them, and you benefit from "white privilege," which makes you evil, even if you had the same personal views as MLK yourself.

You are complicit in what is Christianity and you benefit from your social Christian status amongst Christians in so long as you refuse to speak out against the immoral bullshit your God put in the Bible.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm They won't even give you that much credit. They'll say that even being a police officer makes you "complicit in racism." But as a matter of fact, your claim is simply not true.

In so long as you peddle Christianity without being able to say out loud that your God is a c.u.n.t and you actively disobey his immoral instructions you are complicit also.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm A person can enforce a law as an officer of the law, even if he has no personal stake in the matter at all. He might even not approve of the law. In fact, that's the sort of detachment we demand of a good justice officer...to enforce whatever the people have decided is the law, not to go off based on his own opinions or inclinations.

You mean like you enforce Christian social norms and The Word of The Bible? Without question or personal judgment?

Yeah... You are complicit.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm If you say you're a racist, then who I am to argue with you? I don't claim to know more about you than you do. Perhaps I spoke on your behalf too soon...but if so, you should do something about that.

If you say you are not a sinner... who am I to argue with you. You would be claiming to know yourself better than your God knows you.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm But as for original sin, I think you misunderstand the concept. Original sin refers to the propensity for sin, which is innate.

Exactly like the propensity for racism which is innate.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm But a propensity is not the same as the deed. A person is a sinner two ways: because of what he desires to do, and because of what he does with that desire. Both are sin.

Which is why I have been pointing a finger at the behavior not the cause of the behavior.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm There probably isn't anything better empirically established on Earth than the human propensity to sin. If your particular sin is racism, then that's only because you were already inclined to sin, as all are.If it had not been racism, it would have been lying, abusiveness or theft: your nature would have found some expression. However, it's not guaranteed to involve racism in all cases.

But in all cases it's about original sin.

Our propensity to do what our programming and our society tells us.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:47 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm I can see what you're trying to say. It's just wrong.

It sure sounds like you are claiming that I am committing a systemic error.

No, just an error about SJW language. But that's understandable, because their language-use is highly manipulated and abnormal.

Here's something to help: https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-racism-systemic/

What influences your behavior is not nature OR nurture. It's nature AND nurture.

That presents a problem for "systemic racism." Its supposition is that "racism" is a "systemic," external, collective phenomenon, that has only secondary, much-diminished reference to internal states, but is primarily determined by externals.

A systemic problem is a problem which is a consequence of issues inherent in the overall system rather than due to a specific, individual, isolated factor.

Read your own definition. I've underlined, to help you.

Your individuality is an "isolated factor," according to the SJW's. Your opinion or mental decisions do not make you a "racist." Being in the "system" means you're a racist regardless of those innner states, whatever they may be.

So no, we're not "agreeing." You're persistently missing the point...the SJW's point, that is.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm "Influences" is vague. You've said essentially nothing there. I also "influence" your behaviour, just by writing this: so you're not going to go on to say I "determine" it, are you?

It's not vague!

Yeah, it is.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm You're complicit in what they call "whiteness," according to them, and you benefit from "white privilege," which makes you evil, even if you had the same personal views as MLK yourself.

You are complicit in what is Christianity

That's a "systemic" argument. Now you've got the idea.

I am indeed "complicit" with Christianity. But in my case, it's by reasons and choice. I'm quite content to be a Christian.

But suppose I weren't. Suppose I were, in fact, an agnostic or an Atheist. According to SJW "reasoning," I would still be "complicit" with Christianity, even though my personal choice was opposite. I would be "complicit" merely by being born in, and living in, what they would regard as a "Christian system." But then, much of what they regard is also nonsense, so that need not trouble us.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm If you say you're a racist, then who I am to argue with you? I don't claim to know more about you than you do. Perhaps I spoke on your behalf too soon...but if so, you should do something about that.

If you say you are not a sinner... who am I to argue with you.

That is a thing I never say.

You would be claiming to know yourself better than your God knows you.

Yes, I would...and like any person who does that, I would be a liar.

"If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us." (John 1:10)

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm But as for original sin, I think you misunderstand the concept. Original sin refers to the propensity for sin, which is innate.

Exactly like the propensity for racism which is innate.

Not at all.

Having a sin nature does not assure one is going to be guilty of every specific sin, anymore than having a love for ice cream guarantees you'll eat chocolate fudge ice cream in specific. You might despise chocolate fudge, and choose to eat fifty other flavours instead.

I asssume you have not actually murdered anyone, have you? But you have your own sins, I'm certain. We all do.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 3:13 pm No, just an error about SJW language. But that's understandable, because their language-use is highly manipulated and abnormal.

All language is highly manipulated. That's the function of language. To manipulate minds.

It's literally how language works.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 3:13 pm That presents a problem for "systemic racism." Its supposition is that "racism" is a "systemic," external, collective phenomenon, that has only secondary, much-diminished reference to internal states, but is primarily determined by externals.

Yeah. It's called learned behaviour. Kinda like how you weren't born a Christian but you were indoctrinated into Christianity.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 3:13 pm Your individuality is an "isolated factor," according to the SJW's. Your opinion or mental decisions do not make you a "racist." Being in the "system" means you're a racist regardless of those innner states, whatever they may be.

Uhuh. You are grasping at straws. And what determines whether you are "being" in the system or not?

What determined whether you are "in" Christianity or "out of" Christianity?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 3:13 pm So no, we're not "agreeing." You're persistently missing the point...the SJW's point, that is.

No. I am persistently missing your point - because you have no point.

Poor attempt to pin your misinterpretation onto "them".

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 3:13 pm I am indeed "complicit" with Christianity. But in my case, it's by reasons and choice. I'm quite content to be a Christian.

That makes it even worse then - you can no longer plead ignorance. Especially if you recongnise no fault with God's immoral teachings.

But to be fair you never really made a choice. You didn't leave and return to Christianity. You stayed a Christian. Because you never really went down any other path.

You are complicit in as much as you are a coward. You are too afraid to speak against Christianity for fear of ostracism.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 3:13 pm But suppose I weren't. Suppose I were, in fact, an agnostic or an Atheist. According to SJW "reasoning," I would still be "complicit" with Christianity, even though my personal choice was opposite. I would be "complicit" merely by being born in, and living in, what they would regard as a "Christian system." But then, much of what they regard is also nonsense, so that need not trouble us.

Your complicity is on a sliding scale. In so far as you are responsible for your own behaviour, you are also responsible for the behaviour you've learned from your fellow Christians, from your Bible and from your God.

And you are responsible for spreading that message unaltered. Despite the harm it causes in modernity.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm "If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us." [/color](John 1:10)

So you have never behaved in a racist manner?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm Not at all.

And now we've arrived at the special pleading.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm
Having a sin nature does not assure one is going to be guilty of every specific sin.

Obviously. So are you claiming that you have never committed the sin of racism? Ever?

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm
I asssume you have not actually murdered anyone, have you? But you have your own sins, I'm certain. We all do.

Obviously I haven't. Because I recognise my murderous nature and I keep my murderous nature in check.

Original sin is a burden. A burden racists don't want to keep in check.

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 3:36 pm

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 3:13 pm No, just an error about SJW language. But that's understandable, because their language-use is highly manipulated and abnormal.

All language is highly manipulated. That's the function of language. To manipulate minds.

It's literally how language works.

Not at all. You need to read some Orwell to recognize the difference, though.

...you weren't born a Christian but you were indoctrinated into Christianity.

You have no idea. But I do find your suggestion entertaining.

Provincial, yes...but entertaining all the same.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 3:13 pm Your individuality is an "isolated factor," according to the SJW's. Your opinion or mental decisions do not make you a "racist." Being in the "system" means you're a racist regardless of those innner states, whatever they may be.

...what determines whether you are "being" in the system or not?

Ask them. They seem to think it's racial, primarily.

You get to be a racist just by being white, or by being in any social system the SJW's decide to dub "racist". It need have nothing at all to do with your actual personal cognitions, apparently.

What determined whether you are "in" Christianity or "out of" Christianity?

I chose to be.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 3:13 pm I am indeed "complicit" with Christianity. But in my case, it's by reasons and choice. I'm quite content to be a Christian.

That makes it even worse then - you can no longer plead ignorance.

I never made that plea. In fact, I affirm the opposite: only a person who really knows what he/she is choosing can be a Christian. Anybody else is merely a fake, a hanger-on, a nominalist. But then, it wasn't me who decided that was the standard: it was Christ.

But to be fair you never really made a choice.

You have no idea, clearly.

But do carry on.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm "If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us." [/color](John 1:10)

So you have never behaved in a racist manner?

I can't say. If borrow your neighbour's toolbox, and don't realize his hammer got into yours, so you don't give it back right away, does that make you a thief?

Figure that out, and you have your answer.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm
Having a sin nature does not assure one is going to be guilty of every specific sin.

Obviously.

Well, then, "original sin" does not tell me whether or not you're a racist. You may only be a liar, a theif, and embezzler, a slanderer, or something else, but not a racist. You'd still be exhibiting both sinful acts and your propensity to sin, either way. And just as you have no idea about my past, I have no idea about yours. So you'll have to judge that.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 2:23 pm
I asssume you have not actually murdered anyone, have you? But you have your own sins, I'm certain. We all do.

Obviously I haven't. Because I recognise my murderous nature and I keep my murderous nature in check.

So you're sure you're not a murderer. But what else are you?

You say you aren't even sure you're not a racist?

Skepdick wrote: ↑Sun Feb 06, 2022 3:36 pm So are you claiming that you have never committed the sin of racism?

The, "sin of racism?" What is that?

If racism is a sin, the entire Bible and Christian religion are dripping with sin. The Bible and Christian religion are as racist as any book or religion in this world, putting CRT to shame. According to the Bible, God's entire way of dealing with human beings is based on race and hereditary characteristics. The God of the Bible invented racism, third only in evil to his first invention, government, and his second invention, war.

[Please don't respond to this if you're too dense to understand the rhetoric.

Fortunately it's all fiction.