3 ms·

I actually took exception on the red light example. Of course, it's conventional that the red light means "stop"; but it's a measurable fact that the convention

by Udik 10y ago

I actually took exception on the red light example. Of course, it's conventional that the red light means "stop"; but it's a measurable fact that the convention exists. And those who tell you that red means stop don't mean it as a universal rule- they'd be be perfectly fine if there were a country where red and green meaning are inverted. Whereas value of human life? As a prescriptive norm, it is certainly enforced in many countries. But as a universal truth? Poorly defined, highly questionable, totally subjective.

nostrademons 10y ago
You can still have observable facts that are social constructions. The key is that without human values, those observable facts would disappear. So for example, we assume that dinosaur fossils would still exist even if humans had never walked the earth, that our sun will turn into a red giant and then a white dwarf long after we can no longer observe it, and that all matter is made out of atoms even if those atoms don't form humans. (Ignore "if a tree falls in a forest and nobody hears it..." arguments for the moment.) These are not socially constructed. But gender roles, for example, are very much observable and very much facts of life, yet gender is still considered a social construct. Money is a very necessary part of life and if you ignore it you won't have a happy one, but money is also a social construct. If all humans disappeared, these facts would cease to have any coherent meaning.
- Udik 10y ago
  > But gender roles, for example, are very much observable and very much facts of life, yet gender is still considered a social construct. By some. IMHO, there's a lot of effort going on in believing and making believe that gender roles are social constructs in spite of all the evidence (evidence, not necessarily proof) of the contrary. Money is equivalent to red traffic lights. Its value is conventional, but the convention itself is objective. Ignore it at your peril (you'll be run over by somebody). If all humans disappeared, the existence of both gender roles (be them social or innate or, as very probable, a mix of the two) and money would still be as objective as dinosaur fossils are today. Our faith in the preciousness of human life would be on the same level (a fossil). The actual preciousness of human life, as a universal fact in itself, never existed in the first place.

by Udik 10y ago

nostrademons 10y ago

You can still have observable facts that are social constructions. The key is that without human values, those observable facts would disappear. So for example, we assume that dinosaur fossils would still exist even if humans had never walked the earth, that our sun will turn into a red giant and then a white dwarf long after we can no longer observe it, and that all matter is made out of atoms even if those atoms don't form humans. (Ignore "if a tree falls in a forest and nobody hears it..." arguments for the moment.) These are not socially constructed. But gender roles, for example, are very much observable and very much facts of life, yet gender is still considered a social construct. Money is a very necessary part of life and if you ignore it you won't have a happy one, but money is also a social construct. If all humans disappeared, these facts would cease to have any coherent meaning.

Udik 10y ago
> But gender roles, for example, are very much observable and very much facts of life, yet gender is still considered a social construct. By some. IMHO, there's a lot of effort going on in believing and making believe that gender roles are social constructs in spite of all the evidence (evidence, not necessarily proof) of the contrary. Money is equivalent to red traffic lights. Its value is conventional, but the convention itself is objective. Ignore it at your peril (you'll be run over by somebody). If all humans disappeared, the existence of both gender roles (be them social or innate or, as very probable, a mix of the two) and money would still be as objective as dinosaur fossils are today. Our faith in the preciousness of human life would be on the same level (a fossil). The actual preciousness of human life, as a universal fact in itself, never existed in the first place.