What is social progressivism?

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

Re: What is social progressivism?

Postby Meno_ » Sun Dec 20, 2020 7:16 pm

d0rkyd00d wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:I think there are two kinds of indirect harm -
  • a linear causal chain of multiple events between a trigger event and a final result
  • a complex obfuscation of multiple causal factors that combine into a final result (usually used to hide the guilty)

If it is merely a linear causal chain of events, I think the party is still provably guilty of the final result but only people who think about it will see that. If it is an obfuscation of many factors the guilty party remains hidden - "escape-goat" strategy. That strategy doesn't make the participant any less guilty - only free from prosecution - a "perfect crime" strategy. The practice of stoning uses that strategy.


I agree, and I'd argue the just conclusion is therefore to prosecute when the evidence is overwhelmingly linear, "beyond a reasonable doubt."

Of course I would reject on a moral basis the manipulation of data in situations where the causal chain is too complex, in the pursuit of monetary gain through litigation.


The relation between reasonable doubt and what becomes 'reasonable' is one in which the rationale becomes contradictory , when indirect multiple casual proof is considered.

There proceeds a downward play against indirect proof, which works against the judgement.

The sensibility of beyond reasonable doubt hinge on a sense of what is reasonable, within the wider context of current values available. (biggie's point).

What do You think?
Meno_
breathless
 
Posts: 8091
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: What is social progressivism?

Postby WendyDarling » Sun Dec 20, 2020 8:33 pm

Problem with indirect harm situations is that often they were not intentioned to cause harm. A lot of these instances happen when people have well meaning intentions which end badly or have no intentions at all but a series of accidents or unknowns occur which bring about unintended harm. Pollution and medical mishaps once fell along those lines until proven to cause direct harm that is why now a lot of products come with warning labels like hot coffee cups warn of being hot, and you have to sign for medical procedures/risks, small objects choke small children. I think when harm is intentional, its direct. I don’t think there’s an ethical reason to condemn one time accidents but we live in a world where justice always means blame rather than self responsibility. Parents should make sure small objects that choke do not find their way into a child’s hand, let alone mouth.
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #2/2

"facts change all the time and not only that, they don't mean anything...."-Peter Kropotkin :evilfun:
"I can hope they have some degree of self-awareness but the facts suggest that
they don't..... "- Peter Kropotkin
. :evilfun:
"you don't know the value of facts and you don't know the value of the ‘TRUTH”... " -Peter Kropotkin :lol:
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 8311
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: What is social progressivism?

Postby Meno_ » Sun Dec 20, 2020 9:03 pm

I get You, but then we linearly arrive to the final arbiter.

Then we put the two modes of reasoning apart , placing them on the opposite side of the scale.

Which one will be the less drought with problems, the multiple de-jure or the supposed defacto adjudication ? It seemes, regardless of this attempted reasoning, the fallback to this dual way of reasoning will necessitate the expressed opinion to simulate the division . on it's own either/or terms of expression.

This is a use of intrinsic bias, without the express qualification which refers to meaning( interpretation) , this way or that. This downplaying of significance by noting no distinction from the signifier, appeals to higher level signification; authority.

The impliciteness of the downward play becomes evident in this appeal process, and not evident in an exact adjudication

Hence the upward lift of linear bias per adjudication not appearent to those who place probable cause as more an initially foreseeable trajectory then that considered as intrinsically reasonable beyond doubt.

I see this a more extended and farther reaching constitutionally long term matter of significance, then the shorter term digression between the two types of argument.

The focii developed are more of a matter over form degression, and the question that apiears to me have direct bearing as to the failure to the utility of such distinction. This is unique to US prepossessing quality to our form of justice system.

That manipulation of facts develops into a basic constitutionally democratic process's collusion with progress, ( in the sense of the constitutional material within interpretations become muted by the vested authority) is , as has become apparent, a very basic and climactic call to action.

The constitutionality of the 6th amendmant is at play here.


A case ' 'Holland vs Illinois' showed the im partiality of juries to be based on unreasonable foreseeability.
Meno_
breathless
 
Posts: 8091
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: What is social progressivism?

Postby d0rkyd00d » Mon Dec 21, 2020 3:45 pm

Meno_ wrote:
d0rkyd00d wrote:
obsrvr524 wrote:I think there are two kinds of indirect harm -
  • a linear causal chain of multiple events between a trigger event and a final result
  • a complex obfuscation of multiple causal factors that combine into a final result (usually used to hide the guilty)

If it is merely a linear causal chain of events, I think the party is still provably guilty of the final result but only people who think about it will see that. If it is an obfuscation of many factors the guilty party remains hidden - "escape-goat" strategy. That strategy doesn't make the participant any less guilty - only free from prosecution - a "perfect crime" strategy. The practice of stoning uses that strategy.


I agree, and I'd argue the just conclusion is therefore to prosecute when the evidence is overwhelmingly linear, "beyond a reasonable doubt."

Of course I would reject on a moral basis the manipulation of data in situations where the causal chain is too complex, in the pursuit of monetary gain through litigation.


The relation between reasonable doubt and what becomes 'reasonable' is one in which the rationale becomes contradictory , when indirect multiple casual proof is considered.

There proceeds a downward play against indirect proof, which works against the judgement.

The sensibility of beyond reasonable doubt hinge on a sense of what is reasonable, within the wider context of current values available. (biggie's point).

What do You think?


I hate to ask, but can you dumb this down for me a bit?

I don't know what you mean by "rationale becomes contradictory," and "there proceeds a downward play against indirect proof."
"So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men." -Voltaire

"If an opinion contrary to your own makes you angry, that is a sign that you are subconsciously aware of having no good reason for thinking as you do."
-Bertrand Russell
d0rkyd00d
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2987
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 3:37 pm

Re: What is social progressivism?

Postby Meno_ » Tue Dec 22, 2020 2:12 am

Just hot home, and read this may I read Your reply and answer accordingly time permitted.


But off the cuff, in stead of dumbing it diwm I will need to quie it up.
Meno_
breathless
 
Posts: 8091
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: What is social progressivism?

Postby Sculptor » Tue Dec 22, 2020 7:08 pm

Gloominary wrote:
Sculptor wrote:
What is social progressivism??


This is what provided me with:

free schooling
affordable housing
freehealth care.
Town Planning
my cure for cancer
the road i drove in on.
the street lights
the policeman on the corner and
the guys in the fire station,
clean water.
Sanitation
transport infrstructure.

Sadly, especually in the last 40 years, it is the people who benefit the most, that pay the least for these things, namely the corporations as without these things they would be able to make zero profits. In the last 40 years the burden of provision for these things has been transfered to the poorest and the most hard working people in society.

I see your list as examples of fiscal progressivism, not sociocultural progressivism, or at least they would be examples of fiscal progressivism if the rich paid the most for them, but since they pay the least for them, they're examples of fiscal regressivism.
Sociocultural progressivism is globalism, misandry, reverse racism and transsexualism on the one hand, and gun control, medical and scientific totalitarianism on the other, all of which I'm opposed to.


You hair splitting eye has not really read the list properly.
Sculptor
 
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:52 pm

Re: What is social progressivism?

Postby d0rkyd00d » Tue Dec 22, 2020 8:01 pm

WendyDarling wrote:Problem with indirect harm situations is that often they were not intentioned to cause harm. A lot of these instances happen when people have well meaning intentions which end badly or have no intentions at all but a series of accidents or unknowns occur which bring about unintended harm. Pollution and medical mishaps once fell along those lines until proven to cause direct harm that is why now a lot of products come with warning labels like hot coffee cups warn of being hot, and you have to sign for medical procedures/risks, small objects choke small children. I think when harm is intentional, its direct. I don’t think there’s an ethical reason to condemn one time accidents but we live in a world where justice always means blame rather than self responsibility. Parents should make sure small objects that choke do not find their way into a child’s hand, let alone mouth.


Wreckless endangerment requires no malintent.
"So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men." -Voltaire

"If an opinion contrary to your own makes you angry, that is a sign that you are subconsciously aware of having no good reason for thinking as you do."
-Bertrand Russell
d0rkyd00d
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2987
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 3:37 pm

Re: What is social progressivism?

Postby Gloominary » Thu Dec 24, 2020 12:49 pm

Silhouette wrote:There's barely any difference between what we both said though.
What you said was basically reiterating my own points, so I'm curious why you thought it was so different.

I make a distinction between leftwing authoritarianism (socialism, cultural progressivism) and rightwing authoritarianism (corporatism, cultural conservatism).
I also make a distinction between more subjective forms of authoritarianism, like the aforementioned left and rightwing authoritarianism and less subjective scientific authoritarianism.

I also divide the domains, spheres or whatever you want to call them into three instead of just two, cultural (libertarianism, progressivism and conservatism), political (republics, democracies and autocracies) and fiscal (capitalism, socialism and corporatism).
Then I added the globalism/nationalism and pacifism/militarism dichotomies for further complexity.
User avatar
Gloominary
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3305
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:58 am
Location: Canada

Re: What is social progressivism?

Postby WendyDarling » Thu Dec 24, 2020 6:48 pm

d0rkyd00d wrote:
WendyDarling wrote:Problem with indirect harm situations is that often they were not intentioned to cause harm. A lot of these instances happen when people have well meaning intentions which end badly or have no intentions at all but a series of accidents or unknowns occur which bring about unintended harm. Pollution and medical mishaps once fell along those lines until proven to cause direct harm that is why now a lot of products come with warning labels like hot coffee cups warn of being hot, and you have to sign for medical procedures/risks, small objects choke small children. I think when harm is intentional, its direct. I don’t think there’s an ethical reason to condemn one time accidents but we live in a world where justice always means blame rather than self responsibility. Parents should make sure small objects that choke do not find their way into a child’s hand, let alone mouth.


Wreckless endangerment requires no malintent.

I’d need a case, example. Isn’t wreckless endangerment direct harm? We aren’t guessing who dunnit because the perp chose a dangerous activity with the known potential to cause harm.
Member of The Coalition of Truth - member #2/2

"facts change all the time and not only that, they don't mean anything...."-Peter Kropotkin :evilfun:
"I can hope they have some degree of self-awareness but the facts suggest that
they don't..... "- Peter Kropotkin
. :evilfun:
"you don't know the value of facts and you don't know the value of the ‘TRUTH”... " -Peter Kropotkin :lol:
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 8311
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Previous

Return to Society, Government, and Economics



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: polishyouthgotipbanned