Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

A forum about the forums

Moderator: Carleas

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby iambiguous » Mon Oct 30, 2017 7:20 pm

Alf wrote:
Only_Humean wrote:As I understand it from her user notes, it was for http://ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.ph ... 8#p2683698 and (predominantly) the subsequent postings.

If it had been for that posting and the subsequent postings, then the other two who posted in that thread before Ultimate Philosophy 1001 would have been permabanned for a very, very long time.


It's all politics of course. Except for the parts that are not.

And Trixie was a Kid. Except for the times s/he wasn't. And who knows where the "real" Trixie ends and the personas begin.

I'm not entirely certain where that is applicable even to myself.

Personally, I'm against anyone being permanently banned from ILP. A forum should be created similar to the dungeon at KT. Only members would be permitted to visit.

Trixie, AutSider, Satyr, Lyssa et al were all capable of contributing posts that [while rubbing many the wrong way] provoked thought.

Sure, breaking the rules, huffing and puffing and being deemed an asshole should be reason enough to get you booted from all the other forums. And politics will always be in play here.

But why not set aside a forum for the more extreme opinion.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 22364
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby Alf » Mon Oct 30, 2017 10:31 pm

So you are also saying that the issue is handled in a very unfair/unjust way.
User avatar
Alf
 
Posts: 222
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 12:07 am

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby Arminius » Mon Oct 30, 2017 11:23 pm

Maybe you want to read the following threads:
- viewtopic.php?f=7&t=187220
- viewtopic.php?f=7&t=188302&hilit=lyssa
.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5555
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby Mr Reasonable » Thu Nov 02, 2017 10:17 am

UP1001, on behalf of a bunch of people here who would probably disagree with the notion of me speaking on their behalf, you are now officially unwarned and they're all sorry for their wrongs.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 24691
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby phyllo » Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:32 pm

Trixie, AutSider, Satyr, Lyssa et al were all capable of contributing posts that [while rubbing many the wrong way] provoked thought.
I suspect that Autsider is already back and you will be able to enjoy his quality posts again. :D
"Only the educated are free" - Epictetus
"Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy" -Beethoven
"Everyday life is the way" -Wumen
"Do not permit the events of your daily life to bind you, but never withdraw yourself from them" - Wumen
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10101
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am
Location: ->.

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Thu Nov 02, 2017 5:11 pm

now let me state at the outset, I dislike Trixie
and her many disjointed and confused posts...
however, with that said, banning someone is by its
very nature, subjective... who are we to say, you are allowed
to post and you aren't....one might say the rules.... but
the rules themselves are subjective, subject to change and
interpretation.....I do believe that ILP is better off without
Trixie but, I don't think that any sort of ban is the answer...

if offer a choice, I would vote to allow her to remain....
for the simple reason, that for us to learn, we must allow all
post, all voices to engage, otherwise we risk just having voices
that we approve of and that fit into OUR narrative.....
contrary voices, voices we don't approve of, piss us off, granted
but they are voices we must hear because they do offer us
other options, options we might not be aware of otherwise....

for the truth is not just voices we approve of or that fit into our narrative,
the truth lies in many different voices and we must allow those voices
to be heard... to silence one voice, EVEN IF DONE FOR THE RIGHT REASON,
says something about us louder then we may want to hear....

we will let you speak if only you say what we want to hear

and is that the message ILP really wants to be?

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6036
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby iambiguous » Thu Nov 02, 2017 8:22 pm

Alf wrote:So you are also saying that the issue is handled in a very unfair/unjust way.


No, I'm suggesting that, among other things...

1] the gap between "breaking the rules" and interpreting what that means can sometimes devolve into politics. A personal reaction to some posters that, for whatever reason, particular moderators would like to see gone. The part that I suggest is, in turn, embedded in dasein.

2] some posters here do seem more intent on riling folks up --- trolling? -- than in contributing actual substantive points of view. Or they come here basically to "chit-chat". As though ILP were just one more "social media" outlet.

3] some objectivists here are also extremists. Not only are they intent on espousing one or another religious/political/philosophical etc., narrative, but will often become incensed when others refuse to share their point of view.

They seem unable to resist huffing and puffing. Haranguing those they construe to be "one of them": the "morons", the "retards".

4] Aside from posters who are clearly breaking the rules, how these things are "handled" are either just or unjust, fair or unfair, from a particular subjective point of view. It's just that some insist that, on the contrary, we can always know for sure. By simply agreeing with them.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 22364
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby iambiguous » Thu Nov 02, 2017 8:36 pm

phyllo wrote:
Trixie, AutSider, Satyr, Lyssa et al were all capable of contributing posts that [while rubbing many the wrong way] provoked thought.
I suspect that Autsider is already back and you will be able to enjoy his quality posts again. :D


My interest in AutSider revolves largely around his refusal to engage in an exchange in which we examine his extremist political agenda as derived from 1] a careful intellectual/philosophical examination of the issues and/or 2] rooted more in the manner in which I construe the relationship between objectivism and dasein in a world embedded in both conflicting goods and political economy.

How did he come to believe what he does? How was it embodied in the particular existential trajectory that is his actual lived life?

The psychology of objectivism in other words.

But he won't go there.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 22364
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby phyllo » Thu Nov 02, 2017 9:48 pm

My interest in AutSider revolves largely around his refusal to engage in an exchange in which we examine his extremist political agenda as derived from 1] a careful intellectual/philosophical examination of the issues and/or 2] rooted more in the manner in which I construe the relationship between objectivism and dasein in a world embedded in both conflicting goods and political economy.

How did he come to believe what he does? How was it embodied in the particular existential trajectory that is his actual lived life?

The psychology of objectivism in other words.

But he won't go there.
What significant fact could he tell you? And if he did tell, then how could you possibly appreciate or understand it given that his trajectory is different from yours?

Dasein isolates you from others ... such is the nature of dasein.
:confusion-shrug:
"Only the educated are free" - Epictetus
"Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy" -Beethoven
"Everyday life is the way" -Wumen
"Do not permit the events of your daily life to bind you, but never withdraw yourself from them" - Wumen
phyllo
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10101
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:41 am
Location: ->.

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby Only_Humean » Fri Nov 03, 2017 2:24 pm

Peter Kropotkin wrote:if offer a choice, I would vote to allow her to remain....
for the simple reason, that for us to learn, we must allow all
post, all voices to engage, otherwise we risk just having voices
that we approve of and that fit into OUR narrative.....
contrary voices, voices we don't approve of, piss us off, granted
but they are voices we must hear because they do offer us
other options, options we might not be aware of otherwise....


I disagree strongly that the risk of an echo chamber outweighs any other considerations. There's the risk of this turning into usenet, full of viagra spam and conspiraloons. There's the risk of it turning into a screaming kindergarten. The risk of losing the signal in the noise is considerably greater. That's why this is a moderated philosophy forum. If you want to learn from people who aren't interested in framing philosophical thoughts, that's your good right, but there are many far more appropriate places to do that than here.

There are plenty of posters here with whom I disagree, whose opinions I don't approve of, whom I consider outright wrong/inconsistent/illogical, or facile, and so on. They're all welcome to offer their options, because they do so in a way that allows, even promotes, discussion.
Image

The biology of purpose keeps my nose above the surface.
- Brian Eno
User avatar
Only_Humean
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6192
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:53 am
Location: Right here

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:09 pm

Only_Humean wrote:
Peter Kropotkin wrote:if offer a choice, I would vote to allow her to remain....
for the simple reason, that for us to learn, we must allow all
post, all voices to engage, otherwise we risk just having voices
that we approve of and that fit into OUR narrative.....
contrary voices, voices we don't approve of, piss us off, granted
but they are voices we must hear because they do offer us
other options, options we might not be aware of otherwise....


I disagree strongly that the risk of an echo chamber outweighs any other considerations. There's the risk of this turning into usenet, full of viagra spam and conspiraloons. There's the risk of it turning into a screaming kindergarten. The risk of losing the signal in the noise is considerably greater. That's why this is a moderated philosophy forum. If you want to learn from people who aren't interested in framing philosophical thoughts, that's your good right, but there are many far more appropriate places to do that than here.

There are plenty of posters here with whom I disagree, whose opinions I don't approve of, whom I consider outright wrong/inconsistent/illogical, or facile, and so on. They're all welcome to offer their options, because they do so in a way that allows, even promotes, discussion.


K: thank you for your response.... I suggest however that there is a faction that
is allowed to post here that is anti-Jew, anti-black, anti-minorities and this same faction
has been allowed to post their racist, sexist, conspiracy theories without repercussion...
how is allowing this vile anti-human crap any better then Trixie's insane messages....
having racist, sexist anti-human poster does not "promote" discussion as much as
it denigrates other people...for the sole benefit of making those anti-humans feeling
better about themselves....I would suggest that this is a double standard...allowing
one type of really crappy posting but refusing another type of really crappy posting....
they both are bottom of the barrel posting but if we allow one, we need to
allow the other...I do understand your position.. I am just pointing out the
double standard in really crappy postings.....

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6036
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby Alf » Fri Nov 03, 2017 10:35 pm

Peter Kropotkin wrote:now let me state at the outset, I dislike Trixie...

That's your subjective "opinion" and has nothing to do with the subject here.

Peter Kropotkin wrote: I don't think that any sort of ban is the answer...

That's a more objective contribution, and I can agree to that.
Last edited by Alf on Fri Nov 03, 2017 10:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Alf
 
Posts: 222
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 12:07 am

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby Carleas » Fri Nov 03, 2017 10:36 pm

Peter, there is a significant difference between really crappy posting consisting of all-caps incoherent noise and My Little Pony videos, and really crappy posting consisting of ugly conclusions about race/sex/culture. They might both be properly characterized as "really crappy posting", but they are crappy in really different ways. As such, it doesn't follow that we must treat them the same.

Dealing with racism, sexism, antisemitism, etc. on ILP is difficult. On one hand, it's important to me that people not be punished, and discussion not be prevented, merely because the ideas or arguments are abhorrent. Some ideas that were abhorrent in the past (and are still abhorrent in some communities) are strongly supported by modern progressive humanism, e.g. homosexuality and abortion. So mere abhorrence can't be grounds for censorship or exclusion. On the other hand, it's important to me that everyone with a philosophical bent feel welcome here, regardless of their race, sex, or ethnicity. Some abhorrent ideas, like racism, sexism, and antisemitism, tend to make certain groups feel unwelcome.

The splitting of the baby is that philosophically-expressed ideas, no matter how abhorrent, are permitted. At the same time, abhorrent ideas expressed in uncivil ways -- through the use of epithets, ad hominems, bad faith, trolling, or otherwise in ways that tend to disrupt or derail real consideration of the ideas themselves -- abhorrent ideas expressed cruelly or unphilosophically just have no place here.

That line is easy to explain and to understand, but it is very hard to police in practice, and I personally have failed over and over again to police it effectively. That doesn't mean that the distinction isn't valid or isn't worth policing, it just means that I need to do better.

Trixie was banned because his/her posts were shite, they were 95% noise, and contained a lot of ad hominem, bad faith, mean racism, sexism, and antisemitism. S/he was given many chances, was warned many times that his/her behavior was unacceptable. There is no reason to believe that continued participation would mean any better form of participation. Trixie's presence was a net negative, and there's no reason to believe that ILP will be anything but better off without his/her participation. A permanent ban was appropriate, and in fact long overdue.
User Control Panel > Board preference > Edit display options > Display signatures: No.
Carleas
Magister Ludi
 
Posts: 5413
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 8:10 pm
Location: Washington DC, USA

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Fri Nov 03, 2017 11:01 pm

Carleas wrote:Peter, there is a significant difference between really crappy posting consisting of all-caps incoherent noise and My Little Pony videos, and really crappy posting consisting of ugly conclusions about race/sex/culture. They might both be properly characterized as "really crappy posting", but they are crappy in really different ways. As such, it doesn't follow that we must treat them the same.

Dealing with racism, sexism, antisemitism, etc. on ILP is difficult. On one hand, it's important to me that people not be punished, and discussion not be prevented, merely because the ideas or arguments are abhorrent. Some ideas that were abhorrent in the past (and are still abhorrent in some communities) are strongly supported by modern progressive humanism, e.g. homosexuality and abortion. So mere abhorrence can't be grounds for censorship or exclusion. On the other hand, it's important to me that everyone with a philosophical bent feel welcome here, regardless of their race, sex, or ethnicity. Some abhorrent ideas, like racism, sexism, and antisemitism, tend to make certain groups feel unwelcome.

The splitting of the baby is that philosophically-expressed ideas, no matter how abhorrent, are permitted. At the same time, abhorrent ideas expressed in uncivil ways -- through the use of epithets, ad hominems, bad faith, trolling, or otherwise in ways that tend to disrupt or derail real consideration of the ideas themselves -- abhorrent ideas expressed cruelly or unphilosophically just have no place here.

That line is easy to explain and to understand, but it is very hard to police in practice, and I personally have failed over and over again to police it effectively. That doesn't mean that the distinction isn't valid or isn't worth policing, it just means that I need to do better.

Trixie was banned because his/her posts were shite, they were 95% noise, and contained a lot of ad hominem, bad faith, mean racism, sexism, and antisemitism. S/he was given many chances, was warned many times that his/her behavior was unacceptable. There is no reason to believe that continued participation would mean any better form of participation. Trixie's presence was a net negative, and there's no reason to believe that ILP will be anything but better off without his/her participation. A permanent ban was appropriate, and in fact long overdue.


K: I thank you for your thoughts on this matter....as I see your point, I do agree that Trixie's
presence was a net negative and yet, I disagree with your conclusion.....
it is a subjective opinion that that ILP is better off without Trixie....
I truly dislike the posting of video's in place of argument, but
it is one means of conveying information that otherwise might not be
conveyed by argument.....sometimes, the medium is the message...
sometimes the message is the message....

I am merely playing devil advocate in this matter and have no quarrel with
your decision..... I am just making sure all sides of the argument is
played out...a defender of status quo is as important as a
critique of the status quo...carry on....

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6036
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby iambiguous » Sat Nov 04, 2017 12:09 am

phyllo wrote:
My interest in AutSider revolves largely around his refusal to engage in an exchange in which we examine his extremist political agenda as derived from 1] a careful intellectual/philosophical examination of the issues and/or 2] rooted more in the manner in which I construe the relationship between objectivism and dasein in a world embedded in both conflicting goods and political economy.

How did he come to believe what he does? How was it embodied in the particular existential trajectory that is his actual lived life?

The psychology of objectivism in other words.

But he won't go there.
What significant fact could he tell you? And if he did tell, then how could you possibly appreciate or understand it given that his trajectory is different from yours?


Again: if someone were to ask me explain why, here and now, I think about abortion as I do [embedded in my dilemma], I explain it thusly:

1] I was raised in the belly of the working class beast. My family/community were very conservative. Abortion was a sin.
2] I was drafted into the Army and while on my "tour of duty" in Vietnam I happened upon politically radical folks who reconfigured my thinking about abortion. And God and lots of other things.
3] after I left the Army, I enrolled in college and became further involved in left wing politics. It was all the rage back then. I became a feminist. I married a feminist. I wholeheartedly embraced a woman's right to choose.
4] then came the calamity with Mary and John. I loved them both but their engagement was foundering on the rocks that was Mary's choice to abort their unborn baby.
5] back and forth we all went. I supported Mary but I could understand the points that John was making. I could understand the arguments being made on both sides. John was right from his side and Mary was right from hers.
6] I read William Barrett's Irrational Man and came upon his conjectures regarding "rival goods".
7] Then, over time, I abandoned an objectivist frame of mind that revolved around Marxism/feminism. Instead, I became more and more embedded in existentialism. And then as more years passed I became an advocate for moral nihilism.

In other words, I note the extent to which my current ambiguous/ambivalent narrative is derived from:

1] grappling with the issue intellectually, philosophically, politically etc., and...
2] embedded in actual experiences [out in a particular world] that tugged me in different directions existentially

From my frame of mind then, it is always the manner in which value judgments are intertwined -- given both approaches-- that render them only more or less intelligible. Then it comes down to those things that we believe are true "in our head" that we can in turn convince others to believe are true. And then empirically, scientifically establishing it one way or another.

That is where AutSider, in my opinion, refuses to go. Unless of course he can convince you and others that he has in fact gone there.

After all, you and I have gone down this particular path ourselves, haven't we?

phyllo wrote: Dasein isolates you from others ... such is the nature of dasein.
:confusion-shrug:


True. But, in my view, there is an important distinction to be made between identity in the either/or world and identity in the is/ought world.

There are facts about me that are true for everyone. "I" on the other hand, in expressing value judgments [embedded in both moral and political narratives], seems far more an "existential contraption" to me.

Unless of course I'm wrong. Yet how would we go about establishing that [objectively] in turn? I don't think that this is possible in a world sans God.

But then isn't this conjecture just one more "existential contraption" in turn?

And here [I suspect] your guess is as good as mine.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=176529
Then here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=185296
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 22364
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: baltimore maryland

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby Mr Reasonable » Sat Nov 04, 2017 9:02 am

A brony is like an ubermench...just a think a person can get all crazy about. They're equally philosophical concepts.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 24691
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby Alf » Sun Nov 05, 2017 8:37 pm

Discuss the double standard.
User avatar
Alf
 
Posts: 222
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 12:07 am

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby WendyDarling » Mon Nov 06, 2017 1:04 am

Some abhorrent ideas, like racism, sexism, and antisemitism, tend to make certain groups feel unwelcome.

Since when are prejudices worthy of qualifying as abhorrent, as abhorrent as rape, murder, and unmitigated violence? Give me a break.
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 6289
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby Blurry » Mon Nov 06, 2017 2:30 am

WendyDarling wrote:
Some abhorrent ideas, like racism, sexism, and antisemitism, tend to make certain groups feel unwelcome.

Since when are prejudices worthy of qualifying as abhorrent, as abhorrent as rape, murder, and unmitigated violence? Give me a break.


Prejudices very easily lead to rape, murder, and unmitigated violence.
"Nothing is original. Steal from anywhere that resonates with inspiration or fuels your imagination. Devour old films, new films, music, books, paintings, photographs, poems, dreams, random conversations, architecture, bridges, street signs, trees, clouds, bodies of water, light and shadows. Select only things to steal from that speak directly to your soul. If you do this, your work (and theft) will be authentic. Authenticity is invaluable; originality is non-existent. And don't bother concealing your thievery - celebrate it if you feel like it. In any case, always remember what Jean-Luc Godard said: 'It's not where you take things from - it's where you take them to.'" - Jim Jarmusch
User avatar
Blurry
fuck
 
Posts: 4423
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 8:18 pm

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby WendyDarling » Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:27 am

Thanks for agreeing with me Blurry that prejudice and violence are not the same, not all abhorrent. If I were to prefer white people over black people, that's not the same as murder, it is not abhorrent as say gutting someone. A bias is not abhorrent, murder is.
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 6289
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby Blurry » Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:44 am

WendyDarling wrote:Thanks for agreeing with me Blurry that prejudice and violence are not the same, not all abhorrent. If I were to prefer white people over black people, that's not the same as murder, it is not abhorrent as say gutting someone. A bias is not abhorrent, murder is.


Or you might say, both are abhorrent, to different degrees.
"Nothing is original. Steal from anywhere that resonates with inspiration or fuels your imagination. Devour old films, new films, music, books, paintings, photographs, poems, dreams, random conversations, architecture, bridges, street signs, trees, clouds, bodies of water, light and shadows. Select only things to steal from that speak directly to your soul. If you do this, your work (and theft) will be authentic. Authenticity is invaluable; originality is non-existent. And don't bother concealing your thievery - celebrate it if you feel like it. In any case, always remember what Jean-Luc Godard said: 'It's not where you take things from - it's where you take them to.'" - Jim Jarmusch
User avatar
Blurry
fuck
 
Posts: 4423
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 8:18 pm

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby Carleas » Mon Nov 06, 2017 4:46 am

Something does not need to be The Most Abhorrent Thing Possible to be abhorrent. Racism is gross, I abhor it, it's abhorrent.

EDIT:
Blurry wrote:Or you might say, both are abhorrent, to different degrees.

Beat me to it.
User Control Panel > Board preference > Edit display options > Display signatures: No.
Carleas
Magister Ludi
 
Posts: 5413
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 8:10 pm
Location: Washington DC, USA

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby Jakob » Mon Nov 06, 2017 5:39 pm

Prejudice = Weakness, cowardice, braindamage.
Image
For behold, all acts of love and pleasure are my rituals
User avatar
Jakob
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5713
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: look at my suit

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby WendyDarling » Mon Nov 06, 2017 6:09 pm

Prejudice is an affective feeling towards a person or group member based solely on their group membership. The word is often used to refer to preconceived, usually unfavorable, feelings towards people or a person because of their sex, gender, beliefs, values, social class, age, disability, religion, sexuality, race/ethnicity, language, nationality, beauty, occupation, education, criminality, sport team affiliation or other personal characteristics. In this case, it refers to a positive or negative evaluation of another person based on their perceived group membership.~Wiki


Prejudice's are also positive evaluations, people, and you all practice them, both types, the positive and the negative, so whatever liberal delusions float your boat. I'm out.
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 6289
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Unwarn me, I was falsely warned for no reason.

Postby Carleas » Mon Nov 06, 2017 6:44 pm

Wendy, I'm not really sure who you're disagreeing with, but it doesn't seem like it's anyone in this thread. The claim, "Racism is abhorrent" is not inconsistent with the claim, "Murder is more abhorrent than racism", nor with many other claims about other types of prejudice.
User Control Panel > Board preference > Edit display options > Display signatures: No.
Carleas
Magister Ludi
 
Posts: 5413
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 8:10 pm
Location: Washington DC, USA

PreviousNext

Return to Meta



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron