Privilege, Arrogance, Luck & Accountability

Luck - The chance happening of fortunate or adverse events + success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one’s own actions.

Pride - A sense of one’s own proper dignity or value; self-respect. + Pleasure or satisfaction taken in an achievement, possession, or association || Arrogant or disdainful conduct or treatment

Arrogant - Having or displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance. || Marked by or arising from a feeling or assumption of one’s superiority toward others

As a determinist, I believe everything in the present is a product of the past. We do not have free will.

All your achievements or failures, are determined. We don’t choose who we’re born to, where we’re born, what species we’re born as, the time we’re born, our physiology, our siblings, our government etc. All these things are to us, as good as luck. They were products of prior conditions which we had no influence over.

Our environment, internally and externally, determines our identity, our strengths, our weaknesses, our capacity. We didn’t set the ball in motion, therefore, we can’t take credit for our momentum and the results of the momentum.

Is not anyone who displays arrogance a fool? They were pushed onto a pedestal, and then dance around on the pedestal abusing and dismissing all those not on a pedestal. Yet, they did not earn their position. It was luck - chance.

The one on the pedestal, contributed nothing to their position, and it could have easily been any other on the pedestal. Pure chance.

And what of maintaining one’s place on a pedestal?

If one is privileged, and one knows they did not earn the privilege, how can one have the audacity to horde said privilege?

Privilege ought be a burden that has to be either continually justified, or disseminated.

Any one who boasts of privilege ought be held to account.

And they were pushed into arrogance.

Joe: privilege can be both : a gift, a blessing and a curse and a burden. However, if a privilege person messes up, the consequences are inevitable. Oh, how we know how quickly the political winds can shift, and how , when the priveleged persons fal, there appears a litany of sooth sayers assuring those around them of what they have been foretelling all along.

 And yet, the privileged can be as helpful, as they can be miserable in their solitary exclusion, they may go off in tangents, and ego may destroy them for their appearent arrogance.

 So right you are, but try as they try to become clear as to who and what they are in in a changing social terrain,  their misery may not ever find  the company to keep. So they become nihilists, and embrace anyone who has the only virtue which matters: fidelity.

The remembrances of Marcel Proust of the old regime, is a good description of a long gone world, which is of value, if  for no other reason, then to be historically faithful to a specific span of time, out of which romance, chivalry  virtues and great loves reached unheard  summits, albeit retroactively, a theatrical one. As such, the great idealistic romantics chose the best and only available role available to

Them:: the clown.

And arrogance? It may be modified by comic relief.

I agree, and it is my intent with this thread to push them out of it. Or at least give them another perspective to challenge their own with, forcing them to justify their arrogance.

Obe,

Humility through humor, of course I agree with you.

When I speak or justification or dissemination, I’m saying if one is privileged, they could claim that they have no capacity to share their privilege, that any attempt to do so would be a net loss. This is a reasonable justification for privilege.

To support others, as a person who is privileged, is also a means to disseminate because the means of support you offer to others, is your own privilege, thereby losing your edge and bringing upon equal capacity.

Nice. and that is the only possible consistent response. But I also meant isn’t your attitude towards arrogance similar to their attitude towards whatever they are arrogant about. Can’t they say that they are pushing on idiots and failures? Or can’t they said that pride in being what one is does not necessarily entail that one was not lucky. I mean, the nobles of Europe were arrogant based on which womb they came out of. They simply were better. The source of that betterness was not so consequential. It was simply a part of their being (as they viewed it).

Modern arrogants can simply see themselves as superior, luck and effort being a part of their ontology.

[/quote]
part of determinism is that some stuff is not pushable. What this is is nto easy to determine. It’s luck if you are someone who can be pushed (by the right people, no less) to change and reevaluate.

If it is just to force your alteration of their momentum based merely upon your own, isn’t it equally just for them to force alteration of your momentum upon you based merely upon their own?

Determinism vs Free-will is merely a distracting mind game predetermined to lead to no where.

@Moreno

I see distinct difference.

My perception of arrogance, is that it opens the door to harming others. Arrogance can be used as a justification for one’s privilege at the expense of another.

For example, one who says, ‘Might makes right’. In the context that, if one has the power to kill another and accumulate all their property, or enslave another and use them for their personal gain, that it is acceptable and one earned the right to do this to others by fact of their capacity to do so.

I strongly disagree with this.

My approach entails treating others with respect. Not condemning them for what’s beyond their control, but rather, trying to empower them and increase their understanding and health.

I do not seek to advantage myself or justify advantage within myself at the expense of others.

Pride is just feeling good because of certain identifications. That’s fine, I’m not telling anyone to hate themselves or have shame if they feel pride. I just don’t want pride to perpetuate inequality or what I consider abuse.

I’m a hard determinist.

All success, failure and effort was inevitable, a product of the past, according to my beliefs.

There no escape or acts that are beyond the realm of influence, or none that I deem relevant. Why? Because we’re only connected with that which influences us, or which we influence. All else is beyond our ‘reality’.

Yes, I agree.

@James S Saint

They are both equal in terms of their origins, yes, but not equal in terms of their ethics, rationality, sustainability and returns.

One could be motivated by the past to murder indiscriminately. In our current society, this would either lead to one being confined in a cell until one dies, or executed. Is this eventuation in the interest of any parties involved?

If I say, our objective is overall happiness, health and sustainability, and this indiscriminate killer agrees with this objective, then our different approaches to living can be compared and judged. They are not equal methods of living.

My belief in Determinism contributed to posting this thread. It contributed to how I perceive the world, other people, accomplishments and more. It gave me a certain perspective that enabled me to look beyond my indiscretions and those of others, and react to my environment in what I consider a healthier, preferable way.

This is not ‘no where’ to me.

If you’re talking specifically about the battle between Determinism vs Free-will, I’m not really engaging in it and I’m quite comfortable with my position. I don’t have doubts, or any reason to doubt. Yet, I’m always open to new information.

All of which is predetermined of course.

I’m curious how one could effect any change at all given the notion the outcome has already been determined?

If the universe is predetermined as most philosophers seem to think these days then luck does not exist, it is an excuse for events at best.

Most people are arrogant, most people in the West at least are relatively privileged what is interesting is the guilt that comes from this. I am accountable for me being born arbitrarily somewhere but I see no need to apologise for it, any more than I See the need to apologise for being human (well up to a point we are fucking crazy) unlike some people. If guilt drives you to be a better person generally then I am all for the “white” mans’ burden, if it causes you to over analyse yourself, it is perhaps more unhealthy.

The point being of where to draw the line still subsists, between the levels of it, as one man’s acumen may still be another man’s folly, nevertheless, however, it may be safely said that pushing arrogance through may or may not work, depending on case by case situations.

One aside here though: entropically speaking, society as a whole may be forced into a   one dimensional classllessness,, causing such considerations to be mute and inconsequential.

 Having more money to buy more things may not be causitive enough to sustain any appreciatable social distinctions in the long run, if present trends continue.

@Mowk

A pendulum is completely determined to swing from left to right and right to left. Being left is a change from being right, even if it was completely determined by the past.

I don’t expect my actions or the actions of anyone else to produce a result that wasn’t completely determined. What I hope for, is that my actions were determined to have a positive result. That they result in a state that I prefer over the current state.

Since I do not know with certainty all the influences of the present and thus, direction of the future, I make my contributions in hope that they perpetuate themselves.

So, I don’t beleive I’m changing the determined result, but I’m contributing to it, and my will is to do.

@Helandhighwater

Firstly, I do not believe luck exists in terms of what eventuates. The point of luck is that we attribute it to what we have no control over, that we weren’t the cause of. That’s what I wanted to emphasize in the definition. To us, in our ignorance of the true source of the current state of reality, our position evenutated in a means as a good as luck.

Just as we discredit or downplay achievements based on luck in the sporting world, or any other realm, I’m saying that in light of Determinism, everything we currently have is a product of luck in regards to our true contribution.

Why ought we use luck to excuse the cruel or unfair treatment? The arrogant do. I say this is foolish.

Excuse - To explain (a fault or an offense) in the hope of being forgiven or understood

As the definition explains, excuse assumes a fault or offense. Determinism’s applications, for me, are beyond merely excusing wrongs. Determinism motivates me to alter my future actions, based on an increased understanding of the environment. Not only is it a means to excuse wrong, but also a means of humility and fairness. One’s percieved achievments are also altered by the belief. If Determinism was only a means of excuse, one wouldn’t seek to critisize or remove one’s achievements or privilege, which as a Determinist, I am doing.

Therefore, I deny your representation of Determinism as solely a means of excuse.

As I said earlier, I don’t want people to react with shame or guilt at their pride or privilege. I want people to be understanding of the means in which they acquired their privilege, and with that, hope that they humble themselves and treat others with fairness and not perpetuate unfairness.

Most scientists seem to think it is indeterminate to some degree. In any case, I took his use of luck to mean from our persepctive. Not through effort but the luck of the genetic and familial draw.

“So, I don’t beleive I’m changing the determined result, but I’m contributing to it, and my will is to do.”

Either way. :shrug: