4 ms·

is "the earth is flat" a subjective wrong? No. is "climate changes unless you change" a subjective wrong? Yes. Define "change". Also, climate changes without

is "the earth is flat" a subjective wrong? No. is "climate changes unless you change" a subjective wrong? Yes. Define "change". Also, climate changes without individual change. Also, individual change isn't going to impact climate change. is "poverty" a subjective wrong? Do you mean the source of poverty or how to deal with it? Either way, yes both of those are subjective. is "education is important" a subjective right? Yes, this is subjective. Many people have massive student debt and education that doesn't offer them any sort value in the employment marketplace. is "rules of law" a subjective wrong? Yes, how it's carried out very much so. is "same gender, same pay" a subjective right? Yes, because a lot of people would say we've already achieved that in the west and a lot of people feel the opposite. I think you've picked some of the most subjective issues of modern times as your examples of things that are objective in nature.

homarp 8y ago
>individual change isn't going to impact climate change. Each individual not changing is not going to help either. Inaction makes it worse. > Do you mean the source of poverty or how to deal with it? No, I mean "poverty is a bad thing and we should work to eradicate it". As for 'how to deal with it', it's a polical choice. >"education is important" Yes it is. Both for basics (democracy, "being able to make an 'educated' choice when I vote", ) and "AI is coming to get you" >people have massive student debt This is mostly a US problem, no ? The world is bigger. (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9656905 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9656905 ) >education that doesn't offer them any sort value in the employment marketplace. But at the same time, the "learn to code in 30 days" business is booming, because there are jobs there. And education is used at least as a proxy when hiring. >is "rules of law" a subjective wrong? Business can only prosper if rules of law is enforced. So I see "rules of law" as an objective 'right'. "How" is the essence of "rules of law". >I think you've picked some of the most subjective issues of modern times as your examples of things that are objective in nature. Actually, I voluntarily selected the ones where it makes people uncomfortable to acknowledge they are on the wrong side of the "right and wrong", to illustrate what I see as the parent point "every citizen of a self respecting nation has a personal responsibility to fight wrongs".
- malvosenior 8y ago
  You picked a bunch of partisan issues then claimed your side is "right" and the other side is "wrong". I'm not even commenting on what's right or wrong, I'm just saying it's subjective.
  - homarp 8y ago
    Thank you, I think I understand your point about subjectivity now. I have another question, if you can: can you comment on what is right and what is wrong in absolute, if anything is ?
    - malvosenior 8y ago
      I think you can be correct or incorrect about facts (such as the earth being round) but that human society is too complex and there are too many individual and conflicting desires to say that there's a one dimensional scale of good->bad that you can judge it on. Take that remote island tribe that recently murdered a Christian missionary. Was it good or bad that he went there? Was it good or bad that they killed him? Is it good or bad that anthropologists are trying to keep them isolated? Is it good or bad that they want to stay isolated? I don't think those questions can be answered. Society is an emergent behavior built up from individual wants, desires and compromises. There's stability and instability at a macro level but I don't think there's good or bad. There's just different. It strikes me that a lot of modern political thought has embraced pieces of post-modernism but at some level has almost reverted to fundamentalism. "Good" vs. "evil" doesn't sound like the options we should be discussing in a post-religious society.
      - homarp 8y ago
        >[list of good or bad question about what happened in North Sentinel Island ] > I don't think those questions can be answered I don't understand why not. More exactly, if we decide that there is nothing "right" or "wrong", just "dimensions and scales and we can't decide without offensing someone", isn't that a bleak state of mind (and of society) ? >"Good" vs. "evil" doesn't sound like the options we should be discussing in a post-religious society. So only religion can define "good" and "evil" ? Not society as a whole ? or the law - would you agree that the law is just a slowly written process to write down the current state of mind of a society ? What about "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" ? Also just an opinion ? or it's a "religious"-like text and therefore we can talk about "right" and wrong ?

homarp 8y ago

>individual change isn't going to impact climate change. Each individual not changing is not going to help either. Inaction makes it worse. > Do you mean the source of poverty or how to deal with it? No, I mean "poverty is a bad thing and we should work to eradicate it". As for 'how to deal with it', it's a polical choice. >"education is important" Yes it is. Both for basics (democracy, "being able to make an 'educated' choice when I vote", ) and "AI is coming to get you" >people have massive student debt This is mostly a US problem, no ? The world is bigger. (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9656905 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9656905 ) >education that doesn't offer them any sort value in the employment marketplace. But at the same time, the "learn to code in 30 days" business is booming, because there are jobs there. And education is used at least as a proxy when hiring. >is "rules of law" a subjective wrong? Business can only prosper if rules of law is enforced. So I see "rules of law" as an objective 'right'. "How" is the essence of "rules of law". >I think you've picked some of the most subjective issues of modern times as your examples of things that are objective in nature. Actually, I voluntarily selected the ones where it makes people uncomfortable to acknowledge they are on the wrong side of the "right and wrong", to illustrate what I see as the parent point "every citizen of a self respecting nation has a personal responsibility to fight wrongs".

malvosenior 8y ago
You picked a bunch of partisan issues then claimed your side is "right" and the other side is "wrong". I'm not even commenting on what's right or wrong, I'm just saying it's subjective.
- homarp 8y ago
  Thank you, I think I understand your point about subjectivity now. I have another question, if you can: can you comment on what is right and what is wrong in absolute, if anything is ?
  - malvosenior 8y ago
    I think you can be correct or incorrect about facts (such as the earth being round) but that human society is too complex and there are too many individual and conflicting desires to say that there's a one dimensional scale of good->bad that you can judge it on. Take that remote island tribe that recently murdered a Christian missionary. Was it good or bad that he went there? Was it good or bad that they killed him? Is it good or bad that anthropologists are trying to keep them isolated? Is it good or bad that they want to stay isolated? I don't think those questions can be answered. Society is an emergent behavior built up from individual wants, desires and compromises. There's stability and instability at a macro level but I don't think there's good or bad. There's just different. It strikes me that a lot of modern political thought has embraced pieces of post-modernism but at some level has almost reverted to fundamentalism. "Good" vs. "evil" doesn't sound like the options we should be discussing in a post-religious society.
    - homarp 8y ago
      >[list of good or bad question about what happened in North Sentinel Island ] > I don't think those questions can be answered I don't understand why not. More exactly, if we decide that there is nothing "right" or "wrong", just "dimensions and scales and we can't decide without offensing someone", isn't that a bleak state of mind (and of society) ? >"Good" vs. "evil" doesn't sound like the options we should be discussing in a post-religious society. So only religion can define "good" and "evil" ? Not society as a whole ? or the law - would you agree that the law is just a slowly written process to write down the current state of mind of a society ? What about "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" ? Also just an opinion ? or it's a "religious"-like text and therefore we can talk about "right" and wrong ?