7 ms·

Hate is hate. Morality is absolute, not relative.

by thinkingemote 5y ago

numeromancer 5y ago
"All hate is hate, but some hate is more hate than others." -- Hypocrite Valley
- systemvoltage 5y ago
  I would love to see a rise of alternative BigTech (FB, Google, Apple, Microsoft). Not the Parlor kind, but more leaning towards libertarian values and the foundational principles of the United States. Perhaps based in the East Coast: Philadelphia, Chicago or Boston.
  - SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
    What would that look like? A messenger app or forum, sure I can see that, we have 4chan, but I'm having a hard time envisioning a whole bigtech corp embodying those ideals or even what those ideals are that would be embodied.
    - systemvoltage 5y ago
      Based on Chicago principles, less virtue signaling and more doing, apolitical and completely ruthlessly neutral (like Switzerland), highly capitalistic but also with strong integrity, protect the interest of United States and its allies, straightforward CEOs that don’t speak corporate lingo, work with DoD and DARPA, unwavering support for human rights. Above all, have conviction of their own and not buckle under pressure, and won’t sell out to questionable labor practices in China. 100% domestic. Seems to be a common response: if it’s not big tech it’s automatically 4chan.
      - SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
        You're editing a lot, so I want to snapshot what you said at the point of time I'm responding: > Based on Chicago principles, less virtue signaling and more doing, apolitical and completely ruthlessly neutral (like Switzerland), highly capitalistic but also with strong integrity, protect the interest of United States and its allies, straightforward CEOs that don’t speak corporate lingo, work with DoD and DARPA, unwavering support for human rights. Above all, have conviction of their own and not buckle under pressure, and won’t sell out to questionable labor practices in China. 100% domestic. > Seems to be a common response: if it’s not big tech it’s automatically 4chan. That seems like a lot of oxymorons - what are they doing that is apolitical, but also happily involved in defense, but also interested in human rights? And neutral like Switzerland but only in regards to America? If they enable the air force to better bomb civilians in a foreign country is that still apolitical and for human rights? How does it approach the knowledge that those agencies are doing their best to do questionable things to its own citizens rights? What happens in 4 years if domestic policy changes? Do they not lobby? And they never leave the United States? Can you have a Facebook/Google/Amazon and be exclusively in America?
        systemvoltage 5y ago
        Why such a hostile response? I am trying to have a peaceful discussion. And all those rhetorical questions appear to be strawmaning what I am proposing. Oxymorons are currently present in the way Apple does its PR - no problem with sweatshop labor in China, but they'll never miss a chance to have a political opinion about other things - diversity, BLM, Ukraine, etc. Whatever aligns with their audience.
        SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
        I'm not trying to champion Apple, far from it, but I can't see how any sort of consistent policy could be defined from those opposing ideals and I wanted to highlight some I saw, especially when the stated goal is to align with core fundamental principles. As stated, those principles seem in opposition to each-other.
  - adamrezich 5y ago
    that's the stated goal of Gab and its sub-brands, but [insert reasons for why they're bad here]
    - throwaway6734 5y ago
      The CTO of gab posts here and he was actively pushing Russian propoganda pre-invasion
  - causality0 5y ago
    Not big tech, but an internet version of a post office. That is, a government-provided at-cost presence on the web linked to your real identity that can't be taken away from you without a court order and whose only rules are the laws of the United States. I don't think we have it in us, though.
  - zajio1am 5y ago
    > Not the Parlor kind, but more leaning towards libertarian values and the foundational principles of the United States. Yes, but as noted by Scott Alexander: The moral of the story is: if you’re against witch-hunts, and you promise to found your own little utopian community where witch-hunts will never happen, your new society will end up consisting of approximately three principled civil libertarians and seven zillion witches. It will be a terrible place to live even if witch-hunts are genuinely wrong. https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/05/01/neutral-vs-conservative-the-eternal-struggle/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/05/01/neutral-vs-conservativ...
bostonsre 5y ago
I don't think hugs are going to stop russia in ukraine.
dade_ 5y ago
Calls for violence and hate are different things. I don't hate Russians, but I support violence against their soldiers invading Ukraine. Hating someone also doesn't mean they are worth the jail time from a violent act.
- xdennis 5y ago
  I think you'll find that when you see your family and friends being bombed you can't kill the invaders with a clear mind and no hate. There are already multiple car accidents caused by Ukrainian refuges in Romania because they're too distraught due to what they've suffered so far. And you want them to not hate Russians? You can't be rational when you see your battered 5 year old in the morgue.
  - dade_ 5y ago
    I didn't say hate and acts of violence are mutually exclusive, only that they aren't the same thing. Further, I wouldn't judge harshly anyone that exacted revenge though I would remind anyone that "revenge is a dish best served cold."
- kipchak 5y ago
  This seems like it would apply to calls to violence against civillians as well if I'm understanding correctly, "violence against Russians and Russian soldiers". Under that definition "Someone should go start stabbing Russian shoppers in Evropeysky" for example would seem to be ok. edit: it looks like the article has been updated to specify civilians are not included.
gusgus01 5y ago
That's a hotly debated philosophical concept, moral absolutism and moral relativism and everything in between. I'd assume from your statement you're a moral absolutist, but that does not make that statement an absolute truth.
- lern_too_spel 5y ago
  Not only is GP a moral absolutist, but GP's system of morality postulates that hate is bad. It is also possible to be a moral absolutist with other postulates from which you can derive that hate is bad in many cases but not all.
causality0 5y ago
Even as a moral absolutist myself that's a laughable oversimplification bordering on deliberate obtuseness. Obviously all hate is not the same. You call for the extermination of covid-19 and nobody will disagree with you. You call for the extermination of mosquitos and most people won't disagree with you. You call for the extermination of destructive invasive species and a majority of people will agree with you. Some reasons for hate are acceptable and some are not. Hating someone because of their race is not acceptable. Hating someone because they invaded your country and bombed your fleeing women and children is acceptable.
- gruez 5y ago
  > Hating someone because of their race is not acceptable. Hating someone because they invaded your country and bombed your fleeing women and children is acceptable. But the regulations apply to "Russians and Russian soldiers", not just the invaders. Would you be okay with calls of violence against saudi civilians because of their government's involvement in the 9/11 attacks?
  - causality0 5y ago
    They said the calls for violence against Russian soldiers were allowed because this was being used as a proxy for the Russian military, and said it would not apply to prisoners of war. Again, this is deliberate obtuseness. If a pack of grizzly bears break into my house and I scream "Kill the bears!" I'm obviously not calling for genocide against ursus arctos horribilis.
    - gruez 5y ago
      I find it strange that you accuse me of being "obtuse", but you respond with the most softball examples. What about calls of violence against "russians"? Is "let's find russian nationals in ukraine and lynch them" okay? What about "let's invade russia and kill women children as payback"? I would hope not, but based on a permissive reading of the article it certainly seems allowed.
      - 5y ago

Hate is hate. Morality is absolute, not relative.

numeromancer 5y ago

"All hate is hate, but some hate is more hate than others." -- Hypocrite Valley

systemvoltage 5y ago
I would love to see a rise of alternative BigTech (FB, Google, Apple, Microsoft). Not the Parlor kind, but more leaning towards libertarian values and the foundational principles of the United States. Perhaps based in the East Coast: Philadelphia, Chicago or Boston.
- SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
  What would that look like? A messenger app or forum, sure I can see that, we have 4chan, but I'm having a hard time envisioning a whole bigtech corp embodying those ideals or even what those ideals are that would be embodied.
  - systemvoltage 5y ago
    Based on Chicago principles, less virtue signaling and more doing, apolitical and completely ruthlessly neutral (like Switzerland), highly capitalistic but also with strong integrity, protect the interest of United States and its allies, straightforward CEOs that don’t speak corporate lingo, work with DoD and DARPA, unwavering support for human rights. Above all, have conviction of their own and not buckle under pressure, and won’t sell out to questionable labor practices in China. 100% domestic. Seems to be a common response: if it’s not big tech it’s automatically 4chan.
    - SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
      You're editing a lot, so I want to snapshot what you said at the point of time I'm responding: > Based on Chicago principles, less virtue signaling and more doing, apolitical and completely ruthlessly neutral (like Switzerland), highly capitalistic but also with strong integrity, protect the interest of United States and its allies, straightforward CEOs that don’t speak corporate lingo, work with DoD and DARPA, unwavering support for human rights. Above all, have conviction of their own and not buckle under pressure, and won’t sell out to questionable labor practices in China. 100% domestic. > Seems to be a common response: if it’s not big tech it’s automatically 4chan. That seems like a lot of oxymorons - what are they doing that is apolitical, but also happily involved in defense, but also interested in human rights? And neutral like Switzerland but only in regards to America? If they enable the air force to better bomb civilians in a foreign country is that still apolitical and for human rights? How does it approach the knowledge that those agencies are doing their best to do questionable things to its own citizens rights? What happens in 4 years if domestic policy changes? Do they not lobby? And they never leave the United States? Can you have a Facebook/Google/Amazon and be exclusively in America?
      - systemvoltage 5y ago
        Why such a hostile response? I am trying to have a peaceful discussion. And all those rhetorical questions appear to be strawmaning what I am proposing. Oxymorons are currently present in the way Apple does its PR - no problem with sweatshop labor in China, but they'll never miss a chance to have a political opinion about other things - diversity, BLM, Ukraine, etc. Whatever aligns with their audience.
        SketchySeaBeast 5y ago
        I'm not trying to champion Apple, far from it, but I can't see how any sort of consistent policy could be defined from those opposing ideals and I wanted to highlight some I saw, especially when the stated goal is to align with core fundamental principles. As stated, those principles seem in opposition to each-other.
- adamrezich 5y ago
  that's the stated goal of Gab and its sub-brands, but [insert reasons for why they're bad here]
  - throwaway6734 5y ago
    The CTO of gab posts here and he was actively pushing Russian propoganda pre-invasion
- causality0 5y ago
  Not big tech, but an internet version of a post office. That is, a government-provided at-cost presence on the web linked to your real identity that can't be taken away from you without a court order and whose only rules are the laws of the United States. I don't think we have it in us, though.
- zajio1am 5y ago
  > Not the Parlor kind, but more leaning towards libertarian values and the foundational principles of the United States. Yes, but as noted by Scott Alexander: The moral of the story is: if you’re against witch-hunts, and you promise to found your own little utopian community where witch-hunts will never happen, your new society will end up consisting of approximately three principled civil libertarians and seven zillion witches. It will be a terrible place to live even if witch-hunts are genuinely wrong. https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/05/01/neutral-vs-conservative-the-eternal-struggle/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/05/01/neutral-vs-conservativ...

bostonsre 5y ago

I don't think hugs are going to stop russia in ukraine.

dade_ 5y ago

Calls for violence and hate are different things. I don't hate Russians, but I support violence against their soldiers invading Ukraine. Hating someone also doesn't mean they are worth the jail time from a violent act.

xdennis 5y ago
I think you'll find that when you see your family and friends being bombed you can't kill the invaders with a clear mind and no hate. There are already multiple car accidents caused by Ukrainian refuges in Romania because they're too distraught due to what they've suffered so far. And you want them to not hate Russians? You can't be rational when you see your battered 5 year old in the morgue.
- dade_ 5y ago
  I didn't say hate and acts of violence are mutually exclusive, only that they aren't the same thing. Further, I wouldn't judge harshly anyone that exacted revenge though I would remind anyone that "revenge is a dish best served cold."
kipchak 5y ago
This seems like it would apply to calls to violence against civillians as well if I'm understanding correctly, "violence against Russians and Russian soldiers". Under that definition "Someone should go start stabbing Russian shoppers in Evropeysky" for example would seem to be ok. edit: it looks like the article has been updated to specify civilians are not included.

gusgus01 5y ago

That's a hotly debated philosophical concept, moral absolutism and moral relativism and everything in between. I'd assume from your statement you're a moral absolutist, but that does not make that statement an absolute truth.

lern_too_spel 5y ago
Not only is GP a moral absolutist, but GP's system of morality postulates that hate is bad. It is also possible to be a moral absolutist with other postulates from which you can derive that hate is bad in many cases but not all.

causality0 5y ago

Even as a moral absolutist myself that's a laughable oversimplification bordering on deliberate obtuseness. Obviously all hate is not the same. You call for the extermination of covid-19 and nobody will disagree with you. You call for the extermination of mosquitos and most people won't disagree with you. You call for the extermination of destructive invasive species and a majority of people will agree with you. Some reasons for hate are acceptable and some are not. Hating someone because of their race is not acceptable. Hating someone because they invaded your country and bombed your fleeing women and children is acceptable.

gruez 5y ago
> Hating someone because of their race is not acceptable. Hating someone because they invaded your country and bombed your fleeing women and children is acceptable. But the regulations apply to "Russians and Russian soldiers", not just the invaders. Would you be okay with calls of violence against saudi civilians because of their government's involvement in the 9/11 attacks?
- causality0 5y ago
  They said the calls for violence against Russian soldiers were allowed because this was being used as a proxy for the Russian military, and said it would not apply to prisoners of war. Again, this is deliberate obtuseness. If a pack of grizzly bears break into my house and I scream "Kill the bears!" I'm obviously not calling for genocide against ursus arctos horribilis.
  - gruez 5y ago
    I find it strange that you accuse me of being "obtuse", but you respond with the most softball examples. What about calls of violence against "russians"? Is "let's find russian nationals in ukraine and lynch them" okay? What about "let's invade russia and kill women children as payback"? I would hope not, but based on a permissive reading of the article it certainly seems allowed.
    - 5y ago