Philosophy Now Forum

Dubious wrote: ↑Sun Aug 14, 2022 10:18 pm Sounds like a horror story in the form of a morality play!

Some tyrant comes along and has insufficient resources to rule by terror so he invents a rule that the people will be unable to keep unless they ask him for forgiveness or grace.

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 4:11 am

Some tyrant comes along and has insufficient resources to rule by terror so he invents a rule that the people will be unable to keep unless they ask him for forgiveness or grace.

That's a perfect description of Social Justice.

It comes along, and says,

"There's a new sin: it's called "systemic racism." It's everywhere and nowhere, and you're all guilty by birth and skin, even if you grovel in the dust. But you can be an ally, and have the pleasure of licking my boots for me, and then maybe I won't call you "racist" all the time, for no reason."

Yep, you've pegged that. It's the whole strategy of the authoritarian Left today.

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 9:56 am It's the authoritarian bit that's tyrannical regardless of Left or Right.

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 9:56 am

Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 4:11 am

Some tyrant comes along and has insufficient resources to rule by terror so he invents a rule that the people will be unable to keep unless they ask him for forgiveness or grace.

That's a perfect description of Social Justice.

It comes along, and says,

"There's a new sin: it's called "systemic racism." It's everywhere and nowhere, and you're all guilty by birth and skin, even if you grovel in the dust. But you can be an ally, and have the pleasure of licking my boots for me, and then maybe I won't call you "racist" all the time, for no reason."

Yep, you've pegged that. It's the whole strategy of the authoritarian Left today.

It's the authoritarian bit that's tyrannical regardless of Left or Right.

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 10:23 am

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 9:56 am It's the authoritarian bit that's tyrannical regardless of Left or Right.

But that would mean that things like the prohibition of abortion would be tyrannically authoritarian if we allowed that to be the case.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 1:21 pm
Is a prohibition against *murder tyrannical?

Hell, is murder even wrong?
don't answer if you can't say why

*killing the other guy without just cause

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 1:31 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 1:21 pm
Is a prohibition against *murder tyrannical?

Hell, is murder even wrong?
don't answer if you can't say why

*killing the other guy without just cause

Designating something as murder in order to justify banning it is authoritarian.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 2:12 pm

But if we can say why gut shootin' a fella -- any fella, every fella -- just to watch him die is wrong, mebbe we move from bein' authoritarian to bein' moral.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 2:09 pm

Pete H. asked Would it be 'odd' for a moral subjectivist to say to a slave-owner: 'I think you are being immoral'?

Kinda, yeah.

He'd ask why?

What answer could the subjectivist offer other than I don't like it or lots of folks think slavery is wrong or the slaves don't like it.

I don't he'd be moved to set his slaves free.

Granted, an objectivist answer -- becuz you're violating the lives, liberties, and properties of folks who have an inalienable right to those -- probably wouldn't move him either (*though, mebbe, it might get him to thinkin' about why he himself, the slaver, would never willingly accept the leash).




*but probably not...it's a feature of man's psyche: he can turn his fellows into other than human or less than human lickety-split and commit atrocities against them (interesting the predator always has to recast his prey as other-than or less than to justify the murder, the rape, the theft, the slavin', etc....it's almost as though, even in his depravity, the predator knows it's wrong to violate other men and so other men must be reduced to meat first... )

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 2:28 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 2:12 pm

But if we can say why gut shootin' a fella -- any fella, every fella -- just to watch him die is wrong, mebbe we move from bein' authoritarian to bein' moral.

Well, if we were genuinely concerned about the preservation of human life, and we really did want to be moral, and this led us to the conclusion that we didn't want to see fellas being "gut shot", mebbe we wouldn't allow other fellas to own the killing machines known as guns. Or would that be a step too far towards morality?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 2:41 pm

Ah, so we can't own property that kills if we wants to respect life.

So: no guns, knives, baseball bats, box cutters, tire knockers, pressure cookers, or, well, just about anything (cuz just about anything can be weaponized).

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 2:41 pm Anyway: back to that whole authoritarian thing...I guess takin' away property to respect life, that's not? And The State, as the only user of death-dealin' property, that's not?

We can't do much about the misuse of everyday objects, but that is not a good reason to turn a contraption specifically designed for killing into an everyday object.

Does this draw a destinction between "Left" and "Right" authoritarianism, which is what I was originally commenting on?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 1:21 pm

Harbal wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 10:23 am

Belinda wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 9:56 am It's the authoritarian bit that's tyrannical regardless of Left or Right.

But that would mean that things like the prohibition of abortion would be tyrannically authoritarian if we allowed that to be the case.

Is a prohibition against *murder tyrannical?

Hell, is murder even wrong?
don't answer if you can't say why

*killing the other guy without just cause