4 ms·

> It sucks even more that these are some of the kindest and most caring people I know, with better moral character than myself Evidently not? I'd really be cur

> It sucks even more that these are some of the kindest and most caring people I know, with better moral character than myself Evidently not? I'd really be curious how you come to that conclusion, when they apparently don't have the first clue as to how to recognize evil, nor do they seem to care? Are you sure that that's not just the image they promote of themselves, rather than an actual assessment of their behaviour?

throwaway613834 9y ago
> Evidently not? I'd really be curious how you come to that conclusion Uhm... what sort of a response are you expecting that could convince you here? > when they apparently don't have the first clue as to how to recognize evil, nor do they seem to care? How are you so certain that I'm recognizing the evil correctly in the first place? Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to first question that before questioning my assessment of my friends' character? > Are you sure that that's not just the image they promote of themselves, rather than an actual assessment of their behaviour? How high of a bar is "sure" for you? I'm not even "sure" I understand all of my own parents' motivations in life well, let alone my friends'. The way you phrase your question I don't get the impression I could meet that bar realistically about anyone. I can say I'm "sure" enough that I'm considering the possibility of them getting brainwashed as significantly more likely than them having poor moral character. Not sure what other metric I can use really.
- zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
  > Uhm... what sort of a response are you expecting that could convince you here? Well, some sort of reasoning? Like, what do you observe about these friends that leads you to that conclusion? > How are you so certain that I'm recognizing the evil correctly in the first place? Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to first question that before questioning my assessment of my friends' character? I'm not sure why there should be a priority between those question?! It's certainly a valid question, but I just accepted your premise in that regard for the sake of the discussion. After all, I am not trying to come to a conclusion about your friends (whom I don't know anyway), but rather I am trying to understand how you reconcile your observation that they are doing something that you would consider evil with the conclusion that they are of "better moral character than [your]self". To me it seems like that would be a contradiction in terms. I guess I could also just ask what you mean by "good moral character", that this does not cause a contradiction? > How high of a bar is "sure" for you? I'm not even "sure" I understand all of my own parents' motivations in life well, let alone my friends'. The way you phrase your question I don't get the impression I could meet that bar realistically about anyone. I guess I meant something along the lines of "reasonably sure". But also, this wasn't so much a question about your friends, but a question about you: How do you come to the conclusion that they are of "better moral character"? What about those friends makes you think that? And have you considered whether your conclusion isn't more based on what they claim to be, rather than on what you have actually observed them to be? > I can say I'm "sure" enough that I'm considering the possibility of them getting brainwashed as significantly more likely than them having poor moral character. I guess that goes back to the question of what your definition of "moral character" is, but wouldn't brainwashing impair moral character?
adrianratnapala 9y ago
This is dangerous. You are slipping in an assumption that the moral character of people is well reflected by the social institutions they belong to. Nothing I have seen about the world, or read about history gives the slightest hint favouring that assumption. Worse, you are implying that people should be judged by what social context they exist in. It seems far more likely that good people and bad people can end up in all sorts of situtions.
- zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
  > You are slipping in an assumption that the moral character of people is well reflected by the social institutions they belong to. Nothing I have seen about the world, or read about history gives the slightest hint favouring that assumption. Do you think that still holds when you only consider those cases that people actually realistically had control over, and also exclude those who intentionally worked to subvert the institution they were nominally a part of? After all, being the member of a totalitarian state that doesn't allow you to leave the country is a bit of a different thing than signing an employment contract in the US, and I highly suspect that the people we are talking about here also are not in the class of people intentionally subverting the companies they work in, because chances are friends who care about this would know. > Worse, you are implying that people should be judged by what social context they exist in. It seems far more likely that good people and bad people can end up in all sorts of situtions. Well, not as black and white as you make it out to be, that's just a simplification for the sake of being able to discuss things at all. But I absolutely think that social context is significantly correlated with how people should be judged, yes. Also, what exactly do you mean by "moral character"? I don't think it's a particularly well-defined term.

throwaway613834 9y ago

> Evidently not? I'd really be curious how you come to that conclusion Uhm... what sort of a response are you expecting that could convince you here? > when they apparently don't have the first clue as to how to recognize evil, nor do they seem to care? How are you so certain that I'm recognizing the evil correctly in the first place? Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to first question that before questioning my assessment of my friends' character? > Are you sure that that's not just the image they promote of themselves, rather than an actual assessment of their behaviour? How high of a bar is "sure" for you? I'm not even "sure" I understand all of my own parents' motivations in life well, let alone my friends'. The way you phrase your question I don't get the impression I could meet that bar realistically about anyone. I can say I'm "sure" enough that I'm considering the possibility of them getting brainwashed as significantly more likely than them having poor moral character. Not sure what other metric I can use really.

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
> Uhm... what sort of a response are you expecting that could convince you here? Well, some sort of reasoning? Like, what do you observe about these friends that leads you to that conclusion? > How are you so certain that I'm recognizing the evil correctly in the first place? Wouldn't it make a lot more sense to first question that before questioning my assessment of my friends' character? I'm not sure why there should be a priority between those question?! It's certainly a valid question, but I just accepted your premise in that regard for the sake of the discussion. After all, I am not trying to come to a conclusion about your friends (whom I don't know anyway), but rather I am trying to understand how you reconcile your observation that they are doing something that you would consider evil with the conclusion that they are of "better moral character than [your]self". To me it seems like that would be a contradiction in terms. I guess I could also just ask what you mean by "good moral character", that this does not cause a contradiction? > How high of a bar is "sure" for you? I'm not even "sure" I understand all of my own parents' motivations in life well, let alone my friends'. The way you phrase your question I don't get the impression I could meet that bar realistically about anyone. I guess I meant something along the lines of "reasonably sure". But also, this wasn't so much a question about your friends, but a question about you: How do you come to the conclusion that they are of "better moral character"? What about those friends makes you think that? And have you considered whether your conclusion isn't more based on what they claim to be, rather than on what you have actually observed them to be? > I can say I'm "sure" enough that I'm considering the possibility of them getting brainwashed as significantly more likely than them having poor moral character. I guess that goes back to the question of what your definition of "moral character" is, but wouldn't brainwashing impair moral character?

adrianratnapala 9y ago

This is dangerous. You are slipping in an assumption that the moral character of people is well reflected by the social institutions they belong to. Nothing I have seen about the world, or read about history gives the slightest hint favouring that assumption. Worse, you are implying that people should be judged by what social context they exist in. It seems far more likely that good people and bad people can end up in all sorts of situtions.

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 9y ago
> You are slipping in an assumption that the moral character of people is well reflected by the social institutions they belong to. Nothing I have seen about the world, or read about history gives the slightest hint favouring that assumption. Do you think that still holds when you only consider those cases that people actually realistically had control over, and also exclude those who intentionally worked to subvert the institution they were nominally a part of? After all, being the member of a totalitarian state that doesn't allow you to leave the country is a bit of a different thing than signing an employment contract in the US, and I highly suspect that the people we are talking about here also are not in the class of people intentionally subverting the companies they work in, because chances are friends who care about this would know. > Worse, you are implying that people should be judged by what social context they exist in. It seems far more likely that good people and bad people can end up in all sorts of situtions. Well, not as black and white as you make it out to be, that's just a simplification for the sake of being able to discuss things at all. But I absolutely think that social context is significantly correlated with how people should be judged, yes. Also, what exactly do you mean by "moral character"? I don't think it's a particularly well-defined term.