4 ms·

Most children are interested in eating candy. Doesn't mean we should give them unrestricted access to as much candy as they want.

CaptSpify 10y ago
Are you suggesting that a grown adult shouldn't be able to make their own choices?* I find that absurd. *EDIT: To be clear, I'm talking about choices on what sort of media to consume.
- k__ 10y ago
  They are suggesting parents should start parenting again.
  - dpark 10y ago
    This is utterly irrelevant to the topic of Russia blocking porn sites.
- neilellis 10y ago
  All societies provide restrictions on human behaviour. Grown adults do make their own choices. To become gambling addicts, to beat wifes, to lie to each other. Not all of our choices are good or correct. We should always have the humility to accept we can make bad choices and that adulthood doesn't confer some mystical ability to make only good choices. The difference is making restrictions through compassion, as a loving parent does to a child. Compared to making restrictions out of a desire for control, like all authoritarian rulers.
  - CaptSpify 10y ago
    You bring up a good point, in that my question was poorly worded, I've edited it to be more clear.
  - psyc 10y ago
    Both of the stances you're trying to draw a moral distinction between are authoritarian stances.
  - slavik81 10y ago
    That is literally the idea of a nanny state.
- nemo1618 10y ago
  Not necessarily. Adults get fat and rot their teeth out too. We like to think that we are making our own choices, but in reality we are largely prisoners of our genetic programming. Given the choice between broccoli and a marshmallow, well, sure, some people are able to choose the broccoli. But there are strong evolutionary forces that bias us towards choosing the marshmallow every time. And of course the situation is much worse when we are constantly barraged by similar choices in every domain (including media). When we say "people should be able to make their own choices," we pit the superego against the id (for want of better terms). We implicitly take the position that if a person's superego is weaker than their id, that person deserves to fail and suffer. Wouldn't it be better if we could make the path of least resistance also the best choice?
  - dpark 10y ago
    > Wouldn't it be better if we could make the path of least resistance also the best choice? Maybe, but that's a far different question than whether we should ban questionable choices. I'm all for labeling nutrition info. I might be onboard with "sin taxes" on junk food. I'd probably be onboard with restricting advertising on junk food. But I'm in no way in favor of banning marshmallows.
    - nemo1618 10y ago
      I agree that ideally, a total ban wouldn't be necessary. For example, in the 1950's (in America), it wasn't illegal to get a divorce, but there was intense social pressure not to. And even if something is illegal, that doesn't necessarily prevent people from acquiring it. It's just not the path of least resistance.
  - CaptSpify 10y ago
    Are you then suggesting that we put these same humans as the decision maker for what is "bad" vs "good"? This cuts both ways, in that I can't trust someone else to dictate what I should or shouldn't consume because they have their own id/superego in conflict when making that decision.
    - 10y ago

CaptSpify 10y ago

Are you suggesting that a grown adult shouldn't be able to make their own choices?* I find that absurd. *EDIT: To be clear, I'm talking about choices on what sort of media to consume.

k__ 10y ago
They are suggesting parents should start parenting again.
- dpark 10y ago
  This is utterly irrelevant to the topic of Russia blocking porn sites.
neilellis 10y ago
All societies provide restrictions on human behaviour. Grown adults do make their own choices. To become gambling addicts, to beat wifes, to lie to each other. Not all of our choices are good or correct. We should always have the humility to accept we can make bad choices and that adulthood doesn't confer some mystical ability to make only good choices. The difference is making restrictions through compassion, as a loving parent does to a child. Compared to making restrictions out of a desire for control, like all authoritarian rulers.
- CaptSpify 10y ago
  You bring up a good point, in that my question was poorly worded, I've edited it to be more clear.
- psyc 10y ago
  Both of the stances you're trying to draw a moral distinction between are authoritarian stances.
- slavik81 10y ago
  That is literally the idea of a nanny state.
nemo1618 10y ago
Not necessarily. Adults get fat and rot their teeth out too. We like to think that we are making our own choices, but in reality we are largely prisoners of our genetic programming. Given the choice between broccoli and a marshmallow, well, sure, some people are able to choose the broccoli. But there are strong evolutionary forces that bias us towards choosing the marshmallow every time. And of course the situation is much worse when we are constantly barraged by similar choices in every domain (including media). When we say "people should be able to make their own choices," we pit the superego against the id (for want of better terms). We implicitly take the position that if a person's superego is weaker than their id, that person deserves to fail and suffer. Wouldn't it be better if we could make the path of least resistance also the best choice?
- dpark 10y ago
  > Wouldn't it be better if we could make the path of least resistance also the best choice? Maybe, but that's a far different question than whether we should ban questionable choices. I'm all for labeling nutrition info. I might be onboard with "sin taxes" on junk food. I'd probably be onboard with restricting advertising on junk food. But I'm in no way in favor of banning marshmallows.
  - nemo1618 10y ago
    I agree that ideally, a total ban wouldn't be necessary. For example, in the 1950's (in America), it wasn't illegal to get a divorce, but there was intense social pressure not to. And even if something is illegal, that doesn't necessarily prevent people from acquiring it. It's just not the path of least resistance.
- CaptSpify 10y ago
  Are you then suggesting that we put these same humans as the decision maker for what is "bad" vs "good"? This cuts both ways, in that I can't trust someone else to dictate what I should or shouldn't consume because they have their own id/superego in conflict when making that decision.
  - 10y ago