4 ms·

Sure, but 1. The validity of the argument isn't affected by whether one is a hypocrite. If Apple is indeed behaving unethically, it's still behaving unethicall

by geofft 7y ago

Sure, but 1. The validity of the argument isn't affected by whether one is a hypocrite. If Apple is indeed behaving unethically, it's still behaving unethically even if I own an iPhone. If Apple isn't behaving unethically, then you should be able to argue that on grounds other than "you bought an iPhone." The poster in this case made specific, refutable claims - that Apple dodges taxes and can't pay decent wages to their Chinese factory workers. A legitimate counterargument is that they don't in fact dodge taxes or do in fact pay decent wages (or perhaps that their current behavior is okay), not an attack on the person making the argument. 2. Apple products are not a necessity, but in the current era, a smartphone is very close to a necessity (yes, there are people who steadfastly avoid them, and there are also people who live in the forest, that's not what "necessity" means). And there are relatively few options for good smartphones, none of which come from morally blameless companies. (Personally, I find security valuable, and Apple has the best track record of producing phones with long-term security support, which means you can buy fewer Apple products than anything else.) It might be hypocritical to buy a product from company X while steadfastly believing that company X is behaving unethically, but it's hardly a sign that you don't in fact believe that company X behaves unethically. You might simply have weight the alternatives and decided that buying from company X is the best of several bad options.

bluntfang 7y ago
>The validity of the argument isn't affected by whether one is a hypocrite. I personally think it matters how much of an effort the person espousing beliefs is putting in to deviate from the norm their are complaining about. For example, I'm not going to listen to your arguments about climate change if you aren't actively curbing your red meat consumption. Although, if you're making an effort to reduce your red meat consumption, I'll take you more seriously about climate change. It may be virtue signaling, or whatever phrase of the week, but I need people to believe in what they're fighting for. edit: for those downvoting, please leave a remark. It's hard to understand this website since so many people downvote without any response.
- geofft 7y ago
  > For example, I'm not going to listen to your arguments about climate change if you aren't actively curbing your red meat consumption. As it happens, I've considered becoming vegetarian but I'm literally allergic to nuts, and it's hard to have a balanced diet with enough protein if nuts aren't an option. The validity of an argument is even less affected by whether you think the arguer is a hypocrite. Also, would you listen to my argument about how individual red meat consumption is a drop in the bucket of climate change and isn't really worth focusing on?
  - bluntfang 7y ago
    Is soy included in your nut allergy? I'm vegan and don't eat many nuts, although most of my protein comes from soy products. I was vegetarian for a while and used whole milk, eggs, and cheese for protein. Although I believe in the rights of living creatures so I couldn't do the dairy/eggs route any more. There are plenty of foods that will give you enough protein, leafy greens like kale, beans, and rice are a staple of any stir fry/curry and are complete meals nutritionally. fwiw, one of the things i love about my diet that was really hard to get used to was the difference of caloric density of vegetables vs animal products. I am constantly full and sometimes just have a hard time stuffing my face with enough food. I also am an amateur athlete so my caloric needs are probably really different than most people on this site. >Also, would you listen to my argument about how individual red meat consumption is a drop in the bucket of climate change and isn't really worth focusing on? I don't believe we're going to be able to change big business if we don't have the gumption to change our day to day lives. We need to live it in order to make real change, and factory farming, specifically of red meat, is the highest on the list for personal consumption. I also believe we've advanced as a society to not have to rely on killing living beings or manipulating their reproductives cycles for our benefit. edit: I don't understand the downvotes here. I am literally informing someone about MY diet. Can you please add a response if you choose to downvote this post.
    - codr7 7y ago
      You're not supposed to be vegan, that's what's wrong. And if you really have to, you should at least keep quiet about it. It raises far too many uncomfortable questions in the brains of people who really know better but are simply too weak-minded to change their habits.
bcrosby95 7y ago
Sure, but life is busy. If you don't care enough about your beliefs to bother doing anything for them, why should those of us that don't necessarily even hold them give a shit?
- geofft 7y ago
  It's okay for you to dismiss arguments, but if you're going to make counterarguments, clearly life isn't that busy. (But to the actual point - it's hard to infer whether someone "cares enough" about their beliefs. I personally care about Apple's labor practices; I also care a lot about Google's security practices, which are also contributing to serious human rights violations in China. I'm allowed to care about more than one thing at once.)
  - sidibe 7y ago
    How are Googles security practices contributing to human rights violations im China?
    - geofft 7y ago
      https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/11/bad-binder-android-in-wild-exploit.html https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/11/bad-binder-an... I think I mixed up things in my head, sorry - I don't think there's a claim of that exploit being used in China in particular. (I was probably confusing it with https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/08/a-very-deep-dive-into-ios-exploit.html https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/08/a-very-deep-d... / https://techcrunch.com/2019/08/31/china-google-iphone-uyghur/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/08/31/china-google-iphone-uyghur... , which is about iOS, in fact - but IMO there's a big difference between new bugs being discovered and "CVE-2019-2215 permits attackers to fully compromise a device with only untrusted app access or a browser renderer exploit and despite the patch being available in the upstream Linux kernel, it was left unpatched in Android devices for almost 2 years." I don't think either Apple or Google is doing an adequate job here at all, but Apple still seems to be a bit better, between the options.)
fastball 7y ago
1. I think the issue is that "unethically" is a very subjective standard. The hypocrisy does not invalidate the argument, it merely brings into question whether this is an "accurate" moral judgement if it is not serious enough to warrant a (relatively easy) change in behavior from the person espousing it. In other words: morality is very inherently subjective, so hypocrisy does matter. It's not about convincing me that something is happening (like sweatshops). Facts are easy. The problem is convincing me that the thing that is happening is bad. And you're not going to do that if you can't put your money where your mouth is. If you're a hypocrite about issues of morality, you're either preaching to the choir, or you're not going to convince anyone. 2. If I truly believed Apple and every other smartphone manufacturer was causing human suffering to produce their smartphones, my own morality would dictate that my "need" for a smartphone still does not justify the purchase of one. It's a null point to me though, because A. I don't actually believe that Apple's manufacturing practices are "wrong", and B. I know plenty of successful people that get by without smartphones in the current era.
- perl4ever 7y ago
  Hypocrisy is relevant (even if bringing it up is offensive) to whether an opinion is genuine when a person fails to solve a personal problem according to what they claim they believe. It's not relevant when the problem is collective. Your opinion (2) doesn't make any sense to me, because if you did grant that the manufacture of all smartphones involves massive human suffering, how could manufacturing of everything else not?
  - fastball 7y ago
    Not sure I follow? Certain things are made in sweatshops, which many people consider "bad". Not everything is manufactured in a sweatshop.
- Klinky 7y ago
  Are the working standards to a level you would feel comfortable working in? Would you personally be okay putting together smartphone products and/or pulling rare metals out of the ground? The alternative to a smart phone is a feature phone made in a similar factory, and the alternative to that is a landline, also made in a similar factory, and the alternative to all that is maybe a laptop with VoIP, also made in a similar factory... It's exploitation all the way down. When the markets only way to offer prosperity to some is to exploit and shaft others, while maintaining the position of elite classes, there is a problem.

by geofft 7y ago

bluntfang 7y ago

>The validity of the argument isn't affected by whether one is a hypocrite. I personally think it matters how much of an effort the person espousing beliefs is putting in to deviate from the norm their are complaining about. For example, I'm not going to listen to your arguments about climate change if you aren't actively curbing your red meat consumption. Although, if you're making an effort to reduce your red meat consumption, I'll take you more seriously about climate change. It may be virtue signaling, or whatever phrase of the week, but I need people to believe in what they're fighting for. edit: for those downvoting, please leave a remark. It's hard to understand this website since so many people downvote without any response.

geofft 7y ago
> For example, I'm not going to listen to your arguments about climate change if you aren't actively curbing your red meat consumption. As it happens, I've considered becoming vegetarian but I'm literally allergic to nuts, and it's hard to have a balanced diet with enough protein if nuts aren't an option. The validity of an argument is even less affected by whether you think the arguer is a hypocrite. Also, would you listen to my argument about how individual red meat consumption is a drop in the bucket of climate change and isn't really worth focusing on?
- bluntfang 7y ago
  Is soy included in your nut allergy? I'm vegan and don't eat many nuts, although most of my protein comes from soy products. I was vegetarian for a while and used whole milk, eggs, and cheese for protein. Although I believe in the rights of living creatures so I couldn't do the dairy/eggs route any more. There are plenty of foods that will give you enough protein, leafy greens like kale, beans, and rice are a staple of any stir fry/curry and are complete meals nutritionally. fwiw, one of the things i love about my diet that was really hard to get used to was the difference of caloric density of vegetables vs animal products. I am constantly full and sometimes just have a hard time stuffing my face with enough food. I also am an amateur athlete so my caloric needs are probably really different than most people on this site. >Also, would you listen to my argument about how individual red meat consumption is a drop in the bucket of climate change and isn't really worth focusing on? I don't believe we're going to be able to change big business if we don't have the gumption to change our day to day lives. We need to live it in order to make real change, and factory farming, specifically of red meat, is the highest on the list for personal consumption. I also believe we've advanced as a society to not have to rely on killing living beings or manipulating their reproductives cycles for our benefit. edit: I don't understand the downvotes here. I am literally informing someone about MY diet. Can you please add a response if you choose to downvote this post.
  - codr7 7y ago
    You're not supposed to be vegan, that's what's wrong. And if you really have to, you should at least keep quiet about it. It raises far too many uncomfortable questions in the brains of people who really know better but are simply too weak-minded to change their habits.

bcrosby95 7y ago

Sure, but life is busy. If you don't care enough about your beliefs to bother doing anything for them, why should those of us that don't necessarily even hold them give a shit?

geofft 7y ago
It's okay for you to dismiss arguments, but if you're going to make counterarguments, clearly life isn't that busy. (But to the actual point - it's hard to infer whether someone "cares enough" about their beliefs. I personally care about Apple's labor practices; I also care a lot about Google's security practices, which are also contributing to serious human rights violations in China. I'm allowed to care about more than one thing at once.)
- sidibe 7y ago
  How are Googles security practices contributing to human rights violations im China?
  - geofft 7y ago
    https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/11/bad-binder-android-in-wild-exploit.html https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/11/bad-binder-an... I think I mixed up things in my head, sorry - I don't think there's a claim of that exploit being used in China in particular. (I was probably confusing it with https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/08/a-very-deep-dive-into-ios-exploit.html https://googleprojectzero.blogspot.com/2019/08/a-very-deep-d... / https://techcrunch.com/2019/08/31/china-google-iphone-uyghur/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/08/31/china-google-iphone-uyghur... , which is about iOS, in fact - but IMO there's a big difference between new bugs being discovered and "CVE-2019-2215 permits attackers to fully compromise a device with only untrusted app access or a browser renderer exploit and despite the patch being available in the upstream Linux kernel, it was left unpatched in Android devices for almost 2 years." I don't think either Apple or Google is doing an adequate job here at all, but Apple still seems to be a bit better, between the options.)

fastball 7y ago

1. I think the issue is that "unethically" is a very subjective standard. The hypocrisy does not invalidate the argument, it merely brings into question whether this is an "accurate" moral judgement if it is not serious enough to warrant a (relatively easy) change in behavior from the person espousing it. In other words: morality is very inherently subjective, so hypocrisy does matter. It's not about convincing me that something is happening (like sweatshops). Facts are easy. The problem is convincing me that the thing that is happening is bad. And you're not going to do that if you can't put your money where your mouth is. If you're a hypocrite about issues of morality, you're either preaching to the choir, or you're not going to convince anyone. 2. If I truly believed Apple and every other smartphone manufacturer was causing human suffering to produce their smartphones, my own morality would dictate that my "need" for a smartphone still does not justify the purchase of one. It's a null point to me though, because A. I don't actually believe that Apple's manufacturing practices are "wrong", and B. I know plenty of successful people that get by without smartphones in the current era.

perl4ever 7y ago
Hypocrisy is relevant (even if bringing it up is offensive) to whether an opinion is genuine when a person fails to solve a personal problem according to what they claim they believe. It's not relevant when the problem is collective. Your opinion (2) doesn't make any sense to me, because if you did grant that the manufacture of all smartphones involves massive human suffering, how could manufacturing of everything else not?
- fastball 7y ago
  Not sure I follow? Certain things are made in sweatshops, which many people consider "bad". Not everything is manufactured in a sweatshop.
Klinky 7y ago
Are the working standards to a level you would feel comfortable working in? Would you personally be okay putting together smartphone products and/or pulling rare metals out of the ground? The alternative to a smart phone is a feature phone made in a similar factory, and the alternative to that is a landline, also made in a similar factory, and the alternative to all that is maybe a laptop with VoIP, also made in a similar factory... It's exploitation all the way down. When the markets only way to offer prosperity to some is to exploit and shaft others, while maintaining the position of elite classes, there is a problem.