3 ms·

Why? The same people who support the idea behind this article, support the idea that men and women are equal, for example, because they think it ought to be so.

Why? The same people who support the idea behind this article, support the idea that men and women are equal, for example, because they think it ought to be so. And there's a lot more things they say ought to be true that I won't enumerate here because my account will be banned

nkrisc 4y ago
Using your example, the way in which men and women are meant to be equal has no basis in objective reality, just as much the claim that men and women are not equal has no such basis either. Regarding the realm of “is”, we can plainly see men and women are biologically different. But that’s not the argument. The argument is over the question: “should men and women be allowed to share equivalent roles in society, if they desire?” The language can get murky. When someone says, “men and women are equal” I highly doubt they mean that they are equal in the biological or any empirical sense. What they probably mean is, “men and women ought to be equals in society.” On the contrary, some think that “men and women ought not to be equals in society.” I would wager that those many other examples that you think would get you banned from HN fall safely in the camp of “how ought we treat people?” So I’m the end I doing think the JWST is going to change anything here.
- havblue 4y ago
  >The argument is over the question: “should men and women be allowed to share equivalent roles in society, if they desire?” I think that question is settled, more or less. People usually aren't debating whether a certain person occupying a certain role should be permitted or not. The real question that seems to be asked now is more along the lines of: "is the fact that we don't pursue certain roles in society equally a sign of our own inherent wickedness?"
  - nuancebydefault 4y ago
    It doesn't need to be wickedness. It's group thinking. In general, people want to belong to a group or groups. Then it is easy to fall into the trap of us-vs-them thinking. Also animals show this behavior. Also, people want to find meaning, and they use their pattern matching instincts to accomplish that. This explains why people tend to see meaning in for example pictures captured by giant telescopes, or shooting stars for that matter. It's the reason why they built it in the first place. Right, wrong, ought, shall,... all invented by people. The universe only has 'is' and 'was', no 'ought'.

nkrisc 4y ago

Using your example, the way in which men and women are meant to be equal has no basis in objective reality, just as much the claim that men and women are not equal has no such basis either. Regarding the realm of “is”, we can plainly see men and women are biologically different. But that’s not the argument. The argument is over the question: “should men and women be allowed to share equivalent roles in society, if they desire?” The language can get murky. When someone says, “men and women are equal” I highly doubt they mean that they are equal in the biological or any empirical sense. What they probably mean is, “men and women ought to be equals in society.” On the contrary, some think that “men and women ought not to be equals in society.” I would wager that those many other examples that you think would get you banned from HN fall safely in the camp of “how ought we treat people?” So I’m the end I doing think the JWST is going to change anything here.

havblue 4y ago
>The argument is over the question: “should men and women be allowed to share equivalent roles in society, if they desire?” I think that question is settled, more or less. People usually aren't debating whether a certain person occupying a certain role should be permitted or not. The real question that seems to be asked now is more along the lines of: "is the fact that we don't pursue certain roles in society equally a sign of our own inherent wickedness?"
- nuancebydefault 4y ago
  It doesn't need to be wickedness. It's group thinking. In general, people want to belong to a group or groups. Then it is easy to fall into the trap of us-vs-them thinking. Also animals show this behavior. Also, people want to find meaning, and they use their pattern matching instincts to accomplish that. This explains why people tend to see meaning in for example pictures captured by giant telescopes, or shooting stars for that matter. It's the reason why they built it in the first place. Right, wrong, ought, shall,... all invented by people. The universe only has 'is' and 'was', no 'ought'.