5 ms·

Eh, not really. You can talk about quality of conversation, quality of life, quality of friendship. Why not quality of people?

foldr 17y ago
I find the phrase "quality of people" pretty jarring. YMMV, I suppose.
- enneff 17y ago
  I suppose it is important to note that we're talking about the subjective quality of the person. You're lying if you can't look at someone and tell me whether they appear to meet your personal criteria for physical quality. My suspicion is that there is a correlation between self-esteem and ones comfort with the word "quality" when applied to people. I know that anyone whose judgment I respect would view me as a "quality person", so I have no problem with the term. If I was insecure and didn't think of myself as a person of quality, then I might have an issue with the concept.
  - foldr 17y ago
    Do you honestly think I am arguing against the banal and obvious truth that some people are more attractive than other people? I'm not going to rehearse my point all over again, but please, give me some credit... > I know that anyone whose judgment I respect would view me as a "quality person" But then, presumably you wouldn't respect their judgment if they didn't :)
    - enneff 17y ago
      > But then, presumably you wouldn't respect their judgment if they didn't :) Indeed, but that's the point, isn't it?
      - foldr 17y ago
        Well, I don't agree with that. You should respect the judgment of people who think that you're a bad person if they seem to have generally good judgment in other areas. Basically, this is the jester's point in Twelfth Night: "I'm better because of my enemies and worse because of my friends."
- philwelch 17y ago
  Of course you do--the idea of all people being equal is pretty strongly ingrained in our society, so the idea of some people being fundamentally higher or lower quality is difficult to accept.
  - foldr 17y ago
    I don't find it difficult to accept myself. Sure, some people are better at some things than other people. Some people are hot and some people are ugly. If you think that you're some kind of intellectual rebel because you've noticed these obvious truths, then I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but none of this has anything to do with what I was saying. >the idea of all people being equal is pretty strongly ingrained in our society, The idea that all people have equal rights is deeply ingrained, but I've never met anyone who actually thought that everyone was equal in a dumb, literal sense; that's just a straw man.
    - philwelch 17y ago
      "Sure, some people are better at some things than other people. Some people are hot and some people are ugly." No, I meant even more literally--the idea that some people are fundamentally higher or lower quality, that some people have more worth as a human being than others.
      - foldr 17y ago
        That is (a) false and (b) has nothing to do with the point at hand (the OP has "good skin" as one of his indicators of quality -- he's clearly not talking about quality in a deep sense, unless you think that having good skin makes you worth more as a human being!).
        philwelch 17y ago
        Why not? It might make you worth a little more as a human being, all other things kept equal. Wouldn't the perfect human have good skin? Seriously though, the reason describing people as being "high quality" or "low quality" sounds jarring is because on a very fundamental level, it sounds like we're judging people, and judging people is taboo.
- yters 17y ago
  People are ontologically equal, we all have the same fundamental ability to make free moral decisions, which is what makes us human. However, people are not equal in the gifts they've been given. But, I agree with your fundamental point. True relationships aren't based on our external qualities, but on the soul. Today's evolutionary stupidity completely blinds many to deeper relationships.

foldr 17y ago

I find the phrase "quality of people" pretty jarring. YMMV, I suppose.

enneff 17y ago
I suppose it is important to note that we're talking about the subjective quality of the person. You're lying if you can't look at someone and tell me whether they appear to meet your personal criteria for physical quality. My suspicion is that there is a correlation between self-esteem and ones comfort with the word "quality" when applied to people. I know that anyone whose judgment I respect would view me as a "quality person", so I have no problem with the term. If I was insecure and didn't think of myself as a person of quality, then I might have an issue with the concept.
- foldr 17y ago
  Do you honestly think I am arguing against the banal and obvious truth that some people are more attractive than other people? I'm not going to rehearse my point all over again, but please, give me some credit... > I know that anyone whose judgment I respect would view me as a "quality person" But then, presumably you wouldn't respect their judgment if they didn't :)
  - enneff 17y ago
    > But then, presumably you wouldn't respect their judgment if they didn't :) Indeed, but that's the point, isn't it?
    - foldr 17y ago
      Well, I don't agree with that. You should respect the judgment of people who think that you're a bad person if they seem to have generally good judgment in other areas. Basically, this is the jester's point in Twelfth Night: "I'm better because of my enemies and worse because of my friends."
philwelch 17y ago
Of course you do--the idea of all people being equal is pretty strongly ingrained in our society, so the idea of some people being fundamentally higher or lower quality is difficult to accept.
- foldr 17y ago
  I don't find it difficult to accept myself. Sure, some people are better at some things than other people. Some people are hot and some people are ugly. If you think that you're some kind of intellectual rebel because you've noticed these obvious truths, then I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but none of this has anything to do with what I was saying. >the idea of all people being equal is pretty strongly ingrained in our society, The idea that all people have equal rights is deeply ingrained, but I've never met anyone who actually thought that everyone was equal in a dumb, literal sense; that's just a straw man.
  - philwelch 17y ago
    "Sure, some people are better at some things than other people. Some people are hot and some people are ugly." No, I meant even more literally--the idea that some people are fundamentally higher or lower quality, that some people have more worth as a human being than others.
    - foldr 17y ago
      That is (a) false and (b) has nothing to do with the point at hand (the OP has "good skin" as one of his indicators of quality -- he's clearly not talking about quality in a deep sense, unless you think that having good skin makes you worth more as a human being!).
      - philwelch 17y ago
        Why not? It might make you worth a little more as a human being, all other things kept equal. Wouldn't the perfect human have good skin? Seriously though, the reason describing people as being "high quality" or "low quality" sounds jarring is because on a very fundamental level, it sounds like we're judging people, and judging people is taboo.
yters 17y ago
People are ontologically equal, we all have the same fundamental ability to make free moral decisions, which is what makes us human. However, people are not equal in the gifts they've been given. But, I agree with your fundamental point. True relationships aren't based on our external qualities, but on the soul. Today's evolutionary stupidity completely blinds many to deeper relationships.