4 ms·

Yeah I agree that no one acts in a knowingly malicious way. But considering for example racists or eugenicists, it's important to note that no one is born a rac

Yeah I agree that no one acts in a knowingly malicious way. But considering for example racists or eugenicists, it's important to note that no one is born a racist or eugenicist. Those mentalities are always either (1) something other people convince them is the right mentality or (2) a kind of coping mechanism, a way to maintain our belief that we are good or we are competent in the face of some negative signals that may say otherwise. Thus, given the fact that people do change (otherwise they wouldn't have changed to such an unnatural state to begin with), we should rely on the agency of people calling other people out and people being able to increase their self-awareness and learn from their mistakes. I mean, if you disagree with someone, you don't have to convince them, you just have to convince others to join your side. People with different beliefs standing up for them is what creates balance in the world. Of your above examples, I also agree with your point about it always being some group vs the 'others'. But again, none of those people were born with those desires to harm others. It was something developed and something unnatural, likely the response to some negative events. But I don't think we shouldn't distrust human agency altogether just because some people use theirs to cause harm. And we don't have to calculate precisely the total benefit or harm of our future actions in order to have permission to express our agency. I guess it's really about reaching a state of self-awareness to identify if we're acting in an authentic way. Coming back to technology, I'd say with people that want to automate away or control people, they should reflect on why they've come to distrust other people in general. I mean they certainly trust themselves to try to automate away or control other people. Why not trust others similarly? What events or people in their life led them to that mindset?

trashtester 4y ago
> it's important to note that no one is born a racist or eugenicist. I would agree about eugenicist, that one requires some understanding about heritability. But for racism (or similar prejudices based on gender, sexuality, etc), my personal experience, with my own children, indicate that the tendency to group and judge people by their appearance is something that kids to automatically around age 2-3, and that they have to learn to stop. (Kind of like they automatically learn to lie and fight, and have to learn to stop doing that) And since my children are girls with brown skin in an environment where more than half the kids are white, they focus(ed) a lot on their own skin color, and how that makes people different, just as they do about gender and gender expression. Simply by living in the world, they pick up gender and gender expression. If they see violations of gender-typical behaviour or expression, their first reaction is negative, and they have to be told that it is ok for a boy to hit a boy. As for the racism part, luckily I have only seen mild expressions of that beyond the basic tendency to use skin color to categorize people. There was maybe one occurance a few years back with my oldest daughter, which made me sit down with her and explain what racism is and why it is not ok. (When she understood that racism could be used against her mother and herself, this was pretty easy) I think if you travel a bit around the world, especially outside of Europe and the Americas. If you go small towns and villages in Africa, India, South-East Asia, China, Korea and Japan. If you get to know the locals there, not as a tourist, but on a more personal level, you will find that in most places, some kind of racist thinking exists almost everywhere. If you travel with a person of a different race from yours, it will become extra obvious. Lets say that one of you is white, one is black, asians are likely to treat you quite differently. In some places, there is strong prejudice against Indian people, in some place prejudice agasint Chinese people, etc. Now if one of you is openly gay or transsexual, the experience would be even mor extreme, an might turn dangerous in some places. In other places (like Thailand) a transsexual person might receive even less attention than in the most progressive places in the US, though. (In Thailand, it is so normal to be a trans-woman, that coming out of the closet is not seen as an achievement. So even the positive feedback that a trans person might get around progressives in the West would be gone. The thais would just instantly accept that the trans woman is socially a woman.) Oh, and if you think that all those slightly racist or sexist african or asian people are evil people just because of the racism or sexism, maybe you need to look in the mirror. They simply live in a place that has never had the kind of inclusivity movement that western countries have had after WW2. They are not evil, they simply live in a culture* where some kinds of prejudice is still the norm. Get to know them, and you will find that many of them are still good people with good intentions and kind hearts. * Not saying that all asians are the same, I mean if you do end up in some village somewhere where the local culture tolerates or even encourages racism or sexism, that village's culture is what I refer to.
- iroh2727 4y ago
  Ok point taken. But above you were mentioning examples of genocide…. I guess we could decompose something like racism (which I guess extends to other ways of categorizing in-group vs out-group) as (1) natural tendencies to group and make judgments based on groups, which as you mentioned certainly exist, (2) media/culture that shapes us on top of our natural tendencies, and (3) the desire to harm/fight/destroy other groups (which is probably a spectrum of intensity). I guess that (3) is the part that I was saying is often unnatural. (And (2) also of course. I mean it’s clear how Hollywood is a racist propaganda machine for example…) But I guess with genocidal maniacs (or people trying to institute mass control or automation away from human agency) that’s really a question of (3). And of course, there are I’m sure events in those maniacs lives that led them to their views. But certainly they’re not seeing the whole picture, certainly they’re acting out of fear, or to maintain a sense of self-worth or as some other kind of coping mechanism.
  - trashtester 4y ago
    Unfortunately, not only do I belive that your (3) is HIGHLY natural, I believe it predates humans by 10s of millions of years, if not more. Now ask yourself. Do you consider any group of people to be evil, just because they they belong to that group? Maybe the MAGA crowd or Antifa crowd? Maybe just FOX employees or CNN employees? Maybe some group of rich people or maybe some group of poor people, such as immigrants from some specific country? Maybe Christian or Islamic fanatics? If there is any such group you tend to see as Evil just because of their group membership, you are already at risk of ending up with the us-vs-them mentality that is the prerequisite of (3). I freely admit that I'm (at an early stage) of such a state now, as we speak. In the Ukraine vs Russia conflict, I cheer for Ukraine. That means that I don't feel too much compassion for Russian soldiers that die. It is not important enough to me, that I really think that those Russian soldiers are Evil, but it is enough that I've lost most of my empathy for them, as long as they keep fighting. Whenever some group that you see as Other start to become a threat for some group or some goal that you attach high value to, there is a tendency to start to dehumanize that group of Others. If you think they are Evil, that means the process already came quite far. Right after evil, is to see them as not deserving the protection normally given to humans. Effectively, they become orcs, or virmin, to be exterminated. This may be hard to comprehend for someone raised in an affluent, peaceful environment. But once there is a really serious conflict of interests with another group, things change. There are a few factors that can massively expedite this process, such as: 1) People that experience hunger/famine seem to often become extremely hostile to competitor groups after. 2) People who experience (relative) powerty tend to have similar, but weaker reactions. (Think, living through the financial crisis in the west). 3) Real hostile actions perpetrated by members of the opposing group. (Ie George Floyd, the 2020 protests, January 6, 9/11, just to take some American ones). More serious ones are war crimes perpetrated by Germans in WW2 or Russians in Ukraine, if you identify with the victims. 4) Real or perceived threats from the opposing group. (Like Russia threatening to use nukes, or (from the Republican perspective) Democrats opening to borders to get more Democrat voters) 5) A subtle feeling of inferiority. The best example is how wealthy Jews were hated in Europe prior ot WW2, and especially in Germany. Especially when the Germans were living through hard times in the 20s and early 30s, the wealth of the Jews at a time when ethnic Germans were poor and starving, was a to the story that Germans told themselves about being a superior race. Only by defining the Jews as Evil, could the Germans retain their sense of dignity. Because the alternative was too painful. Maybe the Jews were in some way superior to the Germans? But more than anything, I believe the main cause of these kinds of unreconcilable conflicts, is when we think that we are the Good Guys. The only way to maintain that belief, is to always identify our competitors, adversaries or enemies as Evil. To think that we are willing to fight in a conflict vs some other group just to further our own interest can be too much of a challenge to our self-perception of the Good Guys. Much easier if the enemy is Evil, and not really human. There is an alternative, but it is a difficult one. Imagine that a lion is trying to kill your child or other loved one. You have a gun. What do you do? In principle, you may be an animal preservationist. But for YOU your loved one is (most likely) more valued than some random lion. You don't need to think of the Lion as Evil, and you may even feel sad as you pull the trigger. Such a loss! Maybe even if you miss, and the Lion kills your loved one, you still don't hate it. Maybe you even let the Lion escape with the dead body, as it is already too late to save your loved one. Imagine you are a soldier in the trenches of Ukraine (on either side) and you are loyal to your side. Instead of seeing the enemy as Evil, you still think of them as just as human as yourself, just with other values and interests. As you kill him, you are sadedned with empathy, but you still kill him, because the things you are fighting for are more important to you than his life. Maybe the guy next to you cheer, as if the person dying is a good thing, and maybe that makes you even more sad inside. You are not a pacifist, you may be the best soldier in the squad, but you are also not driven by hate. When the enemy surrenders, the guy next to you may want to shoot them, but you make sure they are taken prisoner instead. This approach is much harder than seeing the opponents as Evil. It requires a higher level of maturity. But after the conflict is over, not only do you not face war crime charges, you may be more likely to be able to live with what you have done. The guy next to you may have nightmares about his crimes until the end of his days.

trashtester 4y ago

> it's important to note that no one is born a racist or eugenicist. I would agree about eugenicist, that one requires some understanding about heritability. But for racism (or similar prejudices based on gender, sexuality, etc), my personal experience, with my own children, indicate that the tendency to group and judge people by their appearance is something that kids to automatically around age 2-3, and that they have to learn to stop. (Kind of like they automatically learn to lie and fight, and have to learn to stop doing that) And since my children are girls with brown skin in an environment where more than half the kids are white, they focus(ed) a lot on their own skin color, and how that makes people different, just as they do about gender and gender expression. Simply by living in the world, they pick up gender and gender expression. If they see violations of gender-typical behaviour or expression, their first reaction is negative, and they have to be told that it is ok for a boy to hit a boy. As for the racism part, luckily I have only seen mild expressions of that beyond the basic tendency to use skin color to categorize people. There was maybe one occurance a few years back with my oldest daughter, which made me sit down with her and explain what racism is and why it is not ok. (When she understood that racism could be used against her mother and herself, this was pretty easy) I think if you travel a bit around the world, especially outside of Europe and the Americas. If you go small towns and villages in Africa, India, South-East Asia, China, Korea and Japan. If you get to know the locals there, not as a tourist, but on a more personal level, you will find that in most places, some kind of racist thinking exists almost everywhere. If you travel with a person of a different race from yours, it will become extra obvious. Lets say that one of you is white, one is black, asians are likely to treat you quite differently. In some places, there is strong prejudice against Indian people, in some place prejudice agasint Chinese people, etc. Now if one of you is openly gay or transsexual, the experience would be even mor extreme, an might turn dangerous in some places. In other places (like Thailand) a transsexual person might receive even less attention than in the most progressive places in the US, though. (In Thailand, it is so normal to be a trans-woman, that coming out of the closet is not seen as an achievement. So even the positive feedback that a trans person might get around progressives in the West would be gone. The thais would just instantly accept that the trans woman is socially a woman.) Oh, and if you think that all those slightly racist or sexist african or asian people are evil people just because of the racism or sexism, maybe you need to look in the mirror. They simply live in a place that has never had the kind of inclusivity movement that western countries have had after WW2. They are not evil, they simply live in a culture* where some kinds of prejudice is still the norm. Get to know them, and you will find that many of them are still good people with good intentions and kind hearts. * Not saying that all asians are the same, I mean if you do end up in some village somewhere where the local culture tolerates or even encourages racism or sexism, that village's culture is what I refer to.

iroh2727 4y ago
Ok point taken. But above you were mentioning examples of genocide…. I guess we could decompose something like racism (which I guess extends to other ways of categorizing in-group vs out-group) as (1) natural tendencies to group and make judgments based on groups, which as you mentioned certainly exist, (2) media/culture that shapes us on top of our natural tendencies, and (3) the desire to harm/fight/destroy other groups (which is probably a spectrum of intensity). I guess that (3) is the part that I was saying is often unnatural. (And (2) also of course. I mean it’s clear how Hollywood is a racist propaganda machine for example…) But I guess with genocidal maniacs (or people trying to institute mass control or automation away from human agency) that’s really a question of (3). And of course, there are I’m sure events in those maniacs lives that led them to their views. But certainly they’re not seeing the whole picture, certainly they’re acting out of fear, or to maintain a sense of self-worth or as some other kind of coping mechanism.
- trashtester 4y ago
  Unfortunately, not only do I belive that your (3) is HIGHLY natural, I believe it predates humans by 10s of millions of years, if not more. Now ask yourself. Do you consider any group of people to be evil, just because they they belong to that group? Maybe the MAGA crowd or Antifa crowd? Maybe just FOX employees or CNN employees? Maybe some group of rich people or maybe some group of poor people, such as immigrants from some specific country? Maybe Christian or Islamic fanatics? If there is any such group you tend to see as Evil just because of their group membership, you are already at risk of ending up with the us-vs-them mentality that is the prerequisite of (3). I freely admit that I'm (at an early stage) of such a state now, as we speak. In the Ukraine vs Russia conflict, I cheer for Ukraine. That means that I don't feel too much compassion for Russian soldiers that die. It is not important enough to me, that I really think that those Russian soldiers are Evil, but it is enough that I've lost most of my empathy for them, as long as they keep fighting. Whenever some group that you see as Other start to become a threat for some group or some goal that you attach high value to, there is a tendency to start to dehumanize that group of Others. If you think they are Evil, that means the process already came quite far. Right after evil, is to see them as not deserving the protection normally given to humans. Effectively, they become orcs, or virmin, to be exterminated. This may be hard to comprehend for someone raised in an affluent, peaceful environment. But once there is a really serious conflict of interests with another group, things change. There are a few factors that can massively expedite this process, such as: 1) People that experience hunger/famine seem to often become extremely hostile to competitor groups after. 2) People who experience (relative) powerty tend to have similar, but weaker reactions. (Think, living through the financial crisis in the west). 3) Real hostile actions perpetrated by members of the opposing group. (Ie George Floyd, the 2020 protests, January 6, 9/11, just to take some American ones). More serious ones are war crimes perpetrated by Germans in WW2 or Russians in Ukraine, if you identify with the victims. 4) Real or perceived threats from the opposing group. (Like Russia threatening to use nukes, or (from the Republican perspective) Democrats opening to borders to get more Democrat voters) 5) A subtle feeling of inferiority. The best example is how wealthy Jews were hated in Europe prior ot WW2, and especially in Germany. Especially when the Germans were living through hard times in the 20s and early 30s, the wealth of the Jews at a time when ethnic Germans were poor and starving, was a to the story that Germans told themselves about being a superior race. Only by defining the Jews as Evil, could the Germans retain their sense of dignity. Because the alternative was too painful. Maybe the Jews were in some way superior to the Germans? But more than anything, I believe the main cause of these kinds of unreconcilable conflicts, is when we think that we are the Good Guys. The only way to maintain that belief, is to always identify our competitors, adversaries or enemies as Evil. To think that we are willing to fight in a conflict vs some other group just to further our own interest can be too much of a challenge to our self-perception of the Good Guys. Much easier if the enemy is Evil, and not really human. There is an alternative, but it is a difficult one. Imagine that a lion is trying to kill your child or other loved one. You have a gun. What do you do? In principle, you may be an animal preservationist. But for YOU your loved one is (most likely) more valued than some random lion. You don't need to think of the Lion as Evil, and you may even feel sad as you pull the trigger. Such a loss! Maybe even if you miss, and the Lion kills your loved one, you still don't hate it. Maybe you even let the Lion escape with the dead body, as it is already too late to save your loved one. Imagine you are a soldier in the trenches of Ukraine (on either side) and you are loyal to your side. Instead of seeing the enemy as Evil, you still think of them as just as human as yourself, just with other values and interests. As you kill him, you are sadedned with empathy, but you still kill him, because the things you are fighting for are more important to you than his life. Maybe the guy next to you cheer, as if the person dying is a good thing, and maybe that makes you even more sad inside. You are not a pacifist, you may be the best soldier in the squad, but you are also not driven by hate. When the enemy surrenders, the guy next to you may want to shoot them, but you make sure they are taken prisoner instead. This approach is much harder than seeing the opponents as Evil. It requires a higher level of maturity. But after the conflict is over, not only do you not face war crime charges, you may be more likely to be able to live with what you have done. The guy next to you may have nightmares about his crimes until the end of his days.