4 ms·
"Consider telling Oscar Wilde that there's been no progress since his day, and he was merely a victim of fashion!" This logic breaks down because it's not an i
by Balero 8y ago
"Consider telling Oscar Wilde that there's been no progress since his day, and he was merely a victim of fashion!"
This logic breaks down because it's not an inexorable march forward. However there were a number of societies pre-victorian Britain, in which homosexuality was fully accepted. Such as ancient Greece and at times Rome, and some pre-Roman Celtic societies.
Had their been progress between 0CE and 1900CE? Scientifically and economically, absolutely! Culturally? Well we don't watch people kill each other in the coliseum, or collect the heads of our enemies. OP's point is that all of this cultural 'progress' is just the fashion of the times and that there is no easy to discern linear progress like in science.
- barrkel 8y agoScience is less susceptible to falling back than social progress (and I use progress here as an ordering operator of more just society, rather than a time operator of strictly later), but it happens also.
- Balero 8y agoI think this is a good way of putting it. But it draws to the main point: what is a 'just society' who decides it, what is just for you may not be for me? For example in the USA punishment for crime (including 'victimless' crimes like downloading a song or film) is a major part of the justice system. Whereas in Sweden the main reason behind the justice system is rehabilitation. Is one more just than the other? What if it isn't a victimless crime? Do you think everyone agrees with you? Does what is 'just' change over time, the idea of eye for an eye used to be pretty popular, whereas now, it is much less so. I think this is what OP was getting at, the idea of what a just society is changes (changes is fashion). But I think you really got to the crux of it!
- divanvisagie 8y agoWe went from aqueducts to no running water for a while.