Total posts: 14,582
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
They can be evil for sure, but again, at least those things are based on who you choose to be; not merely the conditions of your birth.
Where you are born is highly correlated with your religion and politics.
And even if it wasn't, I'm still not sure it's in any way "better" to discriminate against someone for a sincerely held belief.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Religion, political party, etc., are choices.
Isn't killing or imprisoning or denying someone a job because of their religion and or political belief just as "evil" as "racism" ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mesmer
I agree with you that "hate" and "otherism" is toxic.
I'm just not sure that "racism" is any more "evil" than hating and or discriminating against someone for their religion (and or non-religion) and or hating people because they believe the earth is flat and or because they don't want to be forced to accept a "vaccine".
Why is it ok to make fun of people for one thing and NOT ok to make fun of them for some other thing??
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
What is the CAUSE of your impulse in this case?Food-poisoning, indigestion, upset stomach, diarrhea♫
Do these CAUSES also have CAUSES ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MarkWebberFan
I believe attraction is contingent on time and place. I want to know where the exceptions lie in your argument.
The present study examined if empathy and perceived similarity relate to
empathic behaviors online. The study featured three real online influencers, one of whom was
white, one Asian, and one Black. In a sample of 115 participants, I found that empathy
significantly, negatively correlated with aggression for the two non-white influencers featured in
our study. For the one white influencer, the more similar viewers felt toward her, the less
aggression they felt toward her behaviors. Controlling for ethnicity of participants, participants
indicated significantly higher levels of perceived similarity toward the white influencer, followed
by the Asian influencer, and the Black influencer. [**]
While it is not "impossible" for any particular human to feel empathy for any other particular human, THE OVERWHELMING TENDENCY is for humans to feel MORE empathy for humans who are perceived to be "more similar".
For example,
Human ethnocentrism—the tendency to view one's group as centrally important and superior to other groups—creates intergroup bias that fuels prejudice, xenophobia, and intergroup violence. Grounded in the idea that ethnocentrism also facilitates within-group trust, cooperation, and coordination, we conjecture that ethnocentrism may be modulated by brain oxytocin, a peptide shown to promote cooperation among in-group members. In double-blind, placebo-controlled designs, males self-administered oxytocin or placebo and privately performed computer-guided tasks to gauge different manifestations of ethnocentric in-group favoritism as well as out-group derogation. Experiments 1 and 2 used the Implicit Association Test to assess in-group favoritism and out-group derogation. Experiment 3 used the infrahumanization task to assess the extent to which humans ascribe secondary, uniquely human emotions to their in-group and to an out-group. Experiments 4 and 5 confronted participants with the option to save the life of a larger collective by sacrificing one individual, nominated as in-group or as out-group. Results show that oxytocin creates intergroup bias because oxytocin motivates in-group favoritism and, to a lesser extent, out-group derogation. These findings call into question the view of oxytocin as an indiscriminate “love drug” or “cuddle chemical” and suggest that oxytocin has a role in the emergence of intergroup conflict and violence. [**]
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Ultimately, this would mean any studies or experiments conducted pre-natural selection to determine the strengths and weaknesses of races would not hold any water post, as any statistically major differences would likely be null and void.
Well stated.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mesmer
However, "racist" isn't wholly that definition. It also has a nonsensical part which conflates racial animosity with mere mention of race.
It is impossible to know someone's birthplace or the birthplace of their parents by simply looking at them.
So when you say "race" do you actually mean "skin-tone" ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mesmer
Why would I want to spend hours constructing an opening case, only for you to respond 'it's a non sequitur, ''wall of text' or restating your conclusion over and over?
Well stated.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mesmer
Everyone agrees that racial differences in sweating capacity is acceptable.
When you say "racial differences" are you talking about "skin-tone differences" ?
The problem arises when I.Q. is mentioned.
It is impossible to discuss "I.Q." without mentioning the efficacy of the specific "I.Q." test used to make your hasty generalization.
For example, a native of Papua New Guinea might not score well on your SAT, but inversely, YOU probably wouldn't score well on their "hunting and survival" test.
So, anti-racists actually need to argue that, overall, all races are identical in intelligence (instead of saying "racist" and calling it a day) -- that's the contention that needs to be addressed, not the strawman he created above.
OR someone might simply point out that while there may be some INCIDENTAL correlations between "skin-tone" and other human characteristics, "skin-tone" itself is not the most efficient indicator of individual fitness for any specific task.
Just to clarify the race realist position, we're talking about the average of the race's I.Qs, not the individual's I.Q. It's entirely possible to have an African American with 120 I.Q who is smarter than a White, Asian or Jew, whilst have the average of the entire African American population be 85 I.Q. which is below the average of White, Asian and Jewish I.Q.
Black and Hispanic or Latino students routinely score lower on the math section of the SAT — a likely result of generations of exclusionary housing, education, and economic policy — which too often means that, rather than reducing existing race gaps, using the test in college admissions reinforces them. [**]
Wealth doesn’t just impact SAT scores. According to a recent report from the Georgetown Center on Education and the Workforce, “Born to Win, Schooled to Lose,” being born wealthy is actually a better indicator of adult success in the U.S. than academic performance. “To succeed in America, it’s better to be born rich than smart,” [**]
BUT LET'S GRANT YOUR PREMISE. ARE YOU SUGGESTING WE SHOULD PRIMARILY SELECT JEWISH ASIANS FOR POSITIONS OF AUTHORITY ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Does PERFECT GOD = PERFECT WEATHER ?lol no
Did PERFECT GOD know what the weather would be before the earth was created ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Great vid.
One more question.
Does PERFECT GOD = PERFECT WEATHER ?
(forget about humans for a second)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
not puppets
Did PERFECT GOD know what humans would do before they were created ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@rbelivb
Anti-racists do not need to argue that all people of all races are identical in every respect.
Well stated.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
PERFECT GOD = PERFECT HUMANSincorrect, a perfect God could have perfect intent to create imperfect humans
HUMANS = PUPPETS OF GOD
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
correct
PERFECT GOD = PERFECT HUMANS = PERFECT WORLD
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
(IFF) human action is CAUSED (THEN) PERFECT GOD CAN CONTROL HUMAN ACTION BY CONTROLLING THE CAUSES OF HUMAN ACTION(IFF) human action is UNCAUSED (THEN) NOBODY CAN CONTROL OR PREDICT HUMAN ACTIONinteresting... the causes of human action do stem back from God
AND GOD IS PERFECT
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mesmer
The fact is that you're fine agreeing that different races sweat different amounts, but as soon as I suggest that races have different intelligence levels, it's "racist". You're the one saying that all races are identical when it comes to intelligence, and then saying that "nobody" believes that the races are "exactly identical in all respects".
In the exact same way that SOME women can lift more weight than SOME men, there are always going to be SOME people of any particular SKIN-TONE that are "smarter" than SOME people of any particular SKIN-TONE.
Qualifying and or Disqualifying someone for a particular task, based purely on their SKIN-TONE would seem to be counter-productive in most cases.
And at the same time, "RACISM" doesn't seem any more or less "evil" than any other logical fallacy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drlebronski
one person can consider foraging in early anprim societies
to be insanely intelligent
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
Before I watch this, what am I supposed to take away or learn from this? I assume you posted this for a reason and not just for my entertainment.
I've watched a lot of Jordan Peterson conversations and this is the best one.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
explain
(IFF) human action is CAUSED (THEN) PERFECT GOD CAN CONTROL HUMAN ACTION BY CONTROLLING THE CAUSES OF HUMAN ACTION
(IFF) human action is UNCAUSED (THEN) NOBODY CAN CONTROL OR PREDICT HUMAN ACTION
Created:
-->
@oromagi
RACISM is "discrimination based upon race or ethnicity." Since you have agreed it is discrimination based upon race, you have described racism by definition.
Since it's impossible to see someone's birthplace or their parent's birthplace, "racism" (as you've defined it) is impossible.
What we call "racism" is more precisely, "discrimination based on skin-tone".
There is only one "race".
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
free will is perfect
Are human actions CAUSED (OR) UNCAUSED?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
1. Your master programmer has not given an overall plan for intelligent creatures to understand their purpose in their creation.
The master-programmer defines the plan.
2. Your master programmer has not acknowledged and allowed both good and evil to co-exist in his program.
The master-programmer defines the purpose and end-goal (teleology) for all life-forms and the planet itself.
3. Your master programmer has not given the intelligent creatures any instructions relative to their expected actions.
There is no "external instruction" for wolves or dolphins or ants, why would "external instruction" be required for any creatures if they are properly designed?
And even iff there is "external instruction" added to the simulation, this becomes simply another variable in the program that can be adjusted to perfection.
4. Your master programmer has not allowed the intelligent creatures free agency to choose between good and evil actions.
Every "intelligent" action is a consequence of a corresponding instinct and desire built into the original design.
The master-programmer can run the simulation to the conclusion to see the result (omniscient) and then rewind it and make any adjustments desired in order to meet teleological imperatives. In other words, if something goes "wrong", the master-programmer can simply tweak the initial variables in order to achieve their desired conclusion.
5. Your master programmer has not provided a meaningful plan for the intelligent creatures to overcome their mistakes.
It is illogical to blame a program, even a hyper-intelligent program for any "mistakes" it might make. Especially when the simulation can be stopped and rewound and "fixed" (omniscience/omnipotence).
It is impossible for the simulation to reach an end-state that is not exactly what the master-programmer intends.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
PERFECT GOD = PERFECT WORLDWhy? Nice equation, but, clearly, the world is not perfect, and that says nothing for the condition of God. This is not his home. It's ours.
Imagine you are a master-computer-programmer.
You are decide to create a simulated cosmos.
You design a planet.
You design some plants and animals to live on that planet.
You design some intelligent creatures.
These intelligent creatures start poisoning the planet and killing each other off.
WHO DO YOU BLAME ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
omnipotence isnt defined by "the ability to do anything you want"
OMNIPOTENCE = POWER MONOPOLY
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
correct, god created the world perfectly in his vision
PERFECTO
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
again perfect is subjective to you pal, god fusing heaven and earth together is the perfect thing for God
THE WORLD IS EXACTLY AS PERFECT GOD INTENDED IT
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
no, intent matters
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR PERFECT GOD'S INTENT TO BE INCONGRUENT WITH PERFECT GOD'S PERFECT EXECUTION OF PERFECT GOD'S INTENT
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR AN OMNISCIENT OMNIPOTENT PERFECT GOD TO PRODUCE "UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES"he didnt do that
DOES THAT MEAN WE AGREE THAT PERFECT GOD = PERFECT WORLD ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
PERFECT GOD'S PERFECT INTENT WAS TO CREATE A WORLD THAT IS PERFECT ACCORDING TO THE PERFECTLY OBJECTIVE DEFINITIONwhere do you get that logic
IF THE WORLD EXISTS AS PERFECT GOD CREATED IT, THEN THERE IS ZERO CHANCE THAT PERFECT GOD "MADE A MISTAKE"
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR AN OMNISCIENT OMNIPOTENT PERFECT GOD TO PRODUCE "UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES"
THEREFORE, EVERY SINGLE DETAIL OF THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT MUST BE EXACTLY AS PERFECT GOD INTENDED
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
perfect is subjective, gods perfect intent was to create a world that isnt perfect
PERFECT GOD'S DEFINITION OF PERFECT IS PERFECTLY OBJECTIVE (AND PERFECT)
PERFECT GOD'S PERFECT INTENT WAS TO CREATE A WORLD THAT IS PERFECT ACCORDING TO THE PERFECTLY OBJECTIVE DEFINITION
(if you don't think the world is perfect (from your SUBJECTIVE human perspective), then you're obviously mistaken)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
(IFF) HUMAN ACTION IS CAUSED (THEN) WHAT CAUSES HUMAN ACTION ??Admittedly this is a particularly difficult question to answer. I won't be able to provide anything empirically satisfactory. It could be a whole host of things which aren't necessarily reproducible--e.g. "desire" to kill doesn't necessarily result in killing or the attempt to kill; on the same token, "desire" to kill doesn't NOT result in killing or the attempt to kill. At my capacity, I could only say that reason is the cause of action; I suppose you could argue that we are a sum of our instincts, experiences, gnosis--both private and shared, etc. which informs said reason but even then it's difficult to establish a direct link between any one of those components and action, since in spite of those components, inaction can result as well.
Eloquently stated.
However, perhaps you might consider the following example.
You eat a lot of delicious food (because you desire delicious food because you've developed a habit of eating things in order to live and they might as well be delicious things) and some time after you've eaten your delicious food, you feel an almost irresistible impulse to rush to the bathroom.
What is the CAUSE of your impulse in this case?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT DESIRE CAUSES (INTENTIONAL) ACTION ?No. Desire results neither in necessary action nor necessary inaction.
(IFF) HUMAN ACTION IS CAUSED (THEN) WHAT CAUSES HUMAN ACTION ??
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT HUMAN ACTION IS CAUSED OR UNCAUSED ?Caused.
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT DESIRE CAUSES (INTENTIONAL) ACTION ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
perfect in what context? Do you see a distinction between a "perfect world" and a world "perfect for God's plan"?
EVERYTHING IS EXACTLY AS THE PERFECT GOD PERFECTLY INTENDED IT TO BE.
THERE IS NO VARIATION.
THERE IS NO DEVIATION.
THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT IS EXACTLY WHAT PERFECT GOD WANTS IT TO BE.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
HUMAN INSTINCT IS THE "CAUSE" OF "SIN"Human action is the cause of "sin."
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT HUMAN ACTION IS CAUSED OR UNCAUSED ?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Athias
THEREFORE, WE LIVE IN A PERFECT WORLDThis needs a bit more elaboration, particularly the establishment of the connection between "perfect plan" and "perfect world." Furthermore, I would add that "perfect" isn't necessarily indicative of "good" or "evil" depending on how its defined. It suffices to say that our world "fits perfectly" into God's plan if that's the argument being made. Does this mean that mean that the world itself is "perfect"? We'd have to know that perfect God's perfect definition.
the connection between "perfect plan" and "perfect world":
PERFECT GOD = PERFECT PLAN = PERFECT-EXECUTION-OF-THE-PERFECTLY-PERFECT-PLAN = PERFECT WORLD
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
well your wrong
Can you be slightly more specific?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
This ignores the fact that God created all things with imperfection in order for those things to learn to be perfect by free will. Yours is the fallacy that an omnipotent God can only act by extreme omnipotence. Nope. He has free will, too.
PERFECT GOD = PERFECT WORLD
A PERFECT OMNISCIENT GOD CANNOT LEARN ANYTHING
A PERFECT OMNIPOTENT GOD CANNOT BLAME OTHERS
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
ok.
HUMAN INSTINCT IS THE "CAUSE" OF "SIN"
THE PERFECT GOD CREATED HUMAN INSTINCT
THE PERFECT GOD KNEW THE CONSEQUENCES OF HUMAN INSTINCT
THE PERFECT GOD FOLLOWED A PERFECT PLAN
AND EVERYTHING IS GOING ACCORDING TO PERFECT GOD'S PERFECTLY PERFECT PLAN
THEREFORE, WE LIVE IN A PERFECT WORLD
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
because free will is perfect
HUMAN DESIRE IS BASED ON HUMAN INSTINCT
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
Oro just used the genetic fallacy.
There it is.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
What's the barrier between GOD'S "intent" and GOD'S actual (IRL) creation?there is none
WHY DOES GOD'S PERFECT "INTENT" NOT MANIFEST AS A PERFECT WORLD?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
god's perfection means that he intent to create was perfect, he EXPLICITY described the world good and not perfect in genesis when he finished creating the world
What's the barrier between GOD'S "intent" and GOD'S actual (IRL) creation?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
We all have the same enemy. The establishment.The establishment is an imaginary bogeyman referred to because it means whatever one wants it to mean. It’s the most meaningless and yet prevalent bad guy in politics, and it is exactly what paved the way for the absurd political discourse being had in this country today.
Everyone wants to remove the current gaggle of corrupt corporate mobster whores and replace them with their own corrupt corporate mobster whores.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@sadolite
What worthless dialogue, my sources are better because I think they are so they beat your sources so that makes me right. Pretty much sums up all debate sights."I don't see what I am looking at and this internet source proves it"
Well stated.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
HOW CAN A PERFECT GOD CREATE ANYTHING LESS THAN PERFECTLY PERFECT?
Created: