"The dumbing down of American is most evident in the slow decay of substantive content in the enormously influential media, the 30 second sound bites (now down to 10 seconds or less), lowest common denominator programming, credulous presentations on pseudoscience and superstition, but especially a kind of celebration of ignorance.” ― Carl Sagan
I call them objectivists myself. But even the objectivists themselves can be more or less informed, more or less intelligent, more or less articulate.
Here, however, the "celebration of ignorance" is on a colossal scale.
Well, you know, if I do say so myself. I don't deny that my own assessment here is any less an existential contraption rooted in dasein and encompassed in my own set of political prejudices. But I'd like to believe that I do aim more for substantive exchanges.
That's why I propose to the objectivists that we take their own value judgments and explore them given this framework:
1] there is a "real me" and there is a set of moral and political values that encompass objectively "the right thing to do". You thought it was one thing, then another, then another.
2] there is no "real me" and there is no set of moral and political values that encompass objectively "the right thing to do". Instead "I" here is embodied subjectively/existentially in dasein, in moral and political prejudices...in the arguments I make for it/this in my signature threads; and specifically in this thread: https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtop ... 1&t=176529 .
And this part:
Also, once you change your moral and political frame of mind, you are acknowledging that you were once wrong about the is/ought world around you. And, once you acknowledge this, you are acknowledging that, sure, you might be wrong again. You are acknowledging that, yeah, given new experiences, new relationships and access to new information, knowledge and ideas, you might be prompted to change your mind again. And again.
And this part:
So, what I suggest is that we focus in on a particular set of circumstances in which we can examine our respective moral and political philosophies. Given all of the points we raise above.
And, most important of all, I'm less interested in what you or I believed/believe regarding all of the things you and I were/are, and more interested in how exactly you and I would go about demonstrating to others that all rational men and women are obligated to think and feel the same.
And especially this part:
You say that "here and now" you are a ________________________________________________________
Okay, let's zero in on a particular context, a particular set of "conflicting goods" in which as this you now choose one set of behaviors that you would not have chosen as one of the many things you once were previously.
As this relates to my own interest in philosophy: morality here and now, immortality there and then.
And as it relates to your interests.
And, here, the lowest common denominator element revolves not just around the fulminating fanatics, but also the yak, yak, yak, social media crowd. An "exchange" often consists of one or two lines here, one or two lines there. Basically "bullshitting".
I need every detail.