I like your focus on non-criminal. To put this into context, I’d say: non-threatening. But beyond that, a “better man” is going to depend on the woman’s tastes.
It doesn’t have to be a job (I was thinking religious with charity worker). It comes down to values and tastes. Some hold soldiers in high regard, others hold charity workers in high regards. Others artists. Others scientists. Others optimists. Others pessimists. Wherever your values lay.
It’s all subjective rather than categorically objective is that what your liberal mind is going with? A better man is not subjective. The best man may be subjective based on personal preferences, but not a better man which would be an acceptable societal average of alike/similar answers of what constitutes a better man, not to be overturned or disregarded by choosing a best man, but better used as a stepping stone to narrow down the best.
^ Not sure what this last part means, but if we’re going based on what the average woman wants in a man, and we force men to conform to that standard, you’ll not only get a bunch of fakes, but a lot of disappointed women.
There’s a LOT of diversity among men and women. Averages don’t mean much.
I’m just not sure why we have to go farther than raising men to not be abusers. Shouldn’t women have a wide variety of different types of men to choose from? If it’s not a matter of a woman’s taste, but objective morality in itself, then why are we focused only on men?
What makes a better man is a cute face, high IQ and large penis. I prefer my men to be a little rough around the edges. And this can all be accomplished through science.
And teaching little boys to live up to that. I’m just saying you’re in precarious waters when you go further out than basic moral principles of respect and anti-abuse. Don’t get too comfortable slipping into the role of moral authority.
Perfectionism in listening to one’s conscience. ← That’s a skill that could be taught to everyone (though I don’t know if it would get rid of diversity). Listening to one’s conscience would have to be paired with a sense of pride in doing the right thing, not guilt.
You can provide the tools for educating an ignorant mind if it is willing to learn but you cannot force it to. Ultimately all self improvement comes from within
Everyone who is compos mentis has a conscience but not all are the same. Guilt is good it as it is admission of error and acceptance of personal responsibility
Everyone who is not insane does have a conscience but like I said they are not all the same
Since what might make one person feel remorse may not make another person feel likewise
We are moral beings but the things that we feel moralistic about can vary quite significantly
I see nothing wrong in principle with eating meat but a vegetarian would. I also have no opinion on abortion in general
but someone who was either very pro or very anti would. Yet I do have a strong moral view on the concept of freedom
of speech but again not everyone would. And they are some examples of what I mean by not everyone having the same
No but that would not make me become a vegetarian because I already know that happens. I know that not every animal
is humanely killed but when I am buying or eating meat that thought never crosses my mind. But I actually eat very little
meat anyway. Some chicken on occasion and sausages more frequently and that is it really. I do regularly eat fish though
I was just talking to Iambiguous about the fact of our shared reality, which requires objective averages rather than subjective personal bubbles. Can’t wait to hear his reply. Averages mean a great deal for they represent a shared reality overall.