5 ms·

Dismissing a multi-millenia multi-cultural fundamental norm as "indoctrination" severely downplays the collective learning of uncountable generations. There is

Dismissing a multi-millenia multi-cultural fundamental norm as "indoctrination" severely downplays the collective learning of uncountable generations. There is a common view of cultural norms as at worst tyrannical or at best random and arbitrary, rather than the sophisticated and curated product of billions of human lives. Social iconoclasts dismiss organized religion, marriage, sexual norms, social duty, gender roles, and cultural traditions. Base human psychology and sociology must bow to their intellect and are theirs to shape as they choose. > For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, > Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, > Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; > Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. > For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, > Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

flerchin 3y ago
Your argument was stronger before your quote of scripture, or whatever it was.
- paulddraper 3y ago
  I don't want to plagiarize, but I can't think of a better descriptor of the cultural zeitgeist than "ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." (St Paul)
  - defrost 3y ago
    > Social iconoclasts dismiss organized religion, marriage, sexual norms, social duty, gender roles, and cultural traditions. It's important to recognise that western organised religion stomped on a great many multi-millenia gender roles and cultural traditions about the globe via colonisation. Promoting what might made right as "the norm" severely downplays the alternative collective learning of uncountable generations.
    - gedy 3y ago
      > It's important to recognise that western organised religion stomped on a great many multi-millenia gender roles and cultural traditions about the globe via colonisation. Sure, but let's be honest that the majority of humanity stabilized around a man and woman having children in a monogamous relationship, with a minority practicing polygamy. The rest were tiny outliers numbers wise. That's not quite the blank slate that some people imply humans are, imho.
      - rayiner 3y ago
        [flagged]
    - rayiner 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - defrost 3y ago
        Check your history, really. Polygamy has been widespread throughout history, eg: In accordance with the marriage-customs of the Egyptians the priests have but one wife, but any other man takes as many as he may determine; and the Egyptians are required to raise all their children in order to increase the population, on the ground that large numbers are the greatest factor in increasing the prosperity of both country and cities. Diodorus Siculus It's been widespread throughout the western christian church also - Popes weren't the only ones with multiple families. > What grinds my gears about this is that it’s always some white American invoking the moral sanction of unspecified black and brown people. What grinds my gears is the sheer number of idiots that assume the internet is made up of white American males. Some of us were tagging along on logistics runs and meeting the Minangkabau, the Bugis, the Fore, and many many other people in the 1960s. To the best of my recollection Paul Gauguin wasn't hanging out in Tahiti for the grinding monogamy. Still, it's hard to bame people in a post missionary world for having culturally blinkered views formed by the pinhole of white saviour pamphlets.
        rayiner 3y ago
irrational 3y ago
Is it a norm? I view all forms of having more than one significant other as being forms of poly. Office spouse, mistress, side boyfriend, sexting other people, etc. I think poly relationships are very common. If you want to quote from the Bible: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. So even looking at porn or thinking sexual thoughts about anyone else is engaging in a poly relationship. By that standard, nearly everyone is in a poly relationship.
- xyzelement 3y ago
  I think you are conflating succumbing to a vice (eg porn) and orienting your life around an identity (eg poly)
  - CobrastanJorji 3y ago
    Interestingly, Catholicism sees the former (doing the bad thing but agreeing that it is bad and that you should stop) as pretty normal, but the latter (deciding the thing is okay) as heresy, the sort of thing that could get you the bell, book, and candle.
    - paulddraper 3y ago
      Yes. This is the Christian concept of faith and grace. "For by grace you have been saved through faith." Because of Christ's grace, your belief is sufficient even if your acts are not.
      - tasuki 3y ago
        I don't understand what you're saying. Don't you find it weird that doing the bad thing but agreeing that it is bad is... okay, while deciding the thing is okay is... heresy?
        true_religion 3y ago
maeil 3y ago
> There is a common view of cultural norms as at worst tyrannical or at best random and arbitrary, rather than the sophisticated and curated product of billions of human lives. > Social iconoclasts dismiss organized religion, marriage, sexual norms, social duty, gender roles, and cultural traditions. Some of the cultural norms you named there are millions of years old and show little variance across cultures and time. Others only a few millennia old at best and show very high variance.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
JambalayaJim 3y ago
> There is a common view of cultural norms as at worst tyrannical or at best random and arbitrary, rather than the sophisticated and curated product of billions of human lives. Examine any of these “fundamental norms” and see that they were not so fundamental after all. With their narratives built to enforce cultural norms today, not genuinely explore lessons from the past. My grandma will _insist_ that homosexuality simply didn’t exist when she was younger. This is the “sophisticated” product you speak of - a blatant denial of reality.
- lazide 3y ago
  Nothing says fun times like pretending denial is a new - or only an old thing. There are tradeoffs to every path, many only visible long after the path is taken. It’s easy to reject the old path because the tradeoffs are visible and it’s clearly not perfect. That doesn’t mean the new path is going to be better - just less known.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
zrezzed 3y ago
> Dismissing a multi-millenia multi-cultural fundamental norm as "indoctrination" severely downplays the collective learning of uncountable generations. I agree in this case, but only because I think marriage is an institution that we’ve learned needs (sometimes strong) active endorsement and it’s pro-social. My view is that cultural norms are at worst tyrannical and at best the essence of being human. > Social iconoclasts dismiss organized religion, marriage, sexual norms, social duty, gender roles, and cultural traditions. This is just true. But this is all of us: we all have a relationship with society around us and dismiss parts of it. As we should.
kibwen 3y ago
> the collective learning of uncountable generations Wisdom in one context can be foolishness in another. To live a good life it is necessary to re-evaluate the actions of your forebears and determine if it is still applicable to your modern context. That doesn't make someone a "social iconoclast", it makes them wise. Our ancestors did the same thing to their ancestors. Homo sapiens is 300,000 years old, and our societies have changed a lot since then, and will continue to change. Note that I personally have no desire to be anything other than monogamous, but I know several people (both young and elderly) who are successfully polyamorous. I also know people who have catastrophically failed at polyamory; but then, of course, I also know people who have catastrophically failed at monogamy. As far as I'm concerned, normalizing polyamory will strengthen monogamy. It seems like some people out there just aren't cut out for monogamy, and in a monogamous world they inevitably become cheaters. Let the polyamorous people remove themselves from the monogamous dating pool and you will exclusively remove people who would otherwise be compelled to cheat.
- orasis 3y ago
  I like this take. Already you see specialization of dating apps toward different relationship styles, with Hinge more focused on Monogamy, Tinder on the casual/singles crowd, and Feeld for the nonmonogamous. I agree this is decidedly positive for the monogamous folks. There is now less risk of them connecting with and falling in love with someone who isn’t a good match.
- rayiner 3y ago
  In your example, there’s a group of people who aren’t cut out for monogamy and are a problem for society no matter what. But I think there’s a much larger group of people that could do it in a society that offers them strong support and reinforcement, who will fail and flounder in a society that leaves them free to make choices. In my culture, neither divorce nor cheating are socially acceptable. Now, I’m happily married to my wife. But I’m also aware that I had better do everything I can to make my marriage happy, because that’s it. My social standing would be devastated if I got divorced. People would be talking about me in hushed tones 12,000 miles away.
  - 3y ago
orasis 3y ago
Note that these cultural norms evolved prior to modern birth control, STI testing/treatment, and peak population. Birth control is a radical invention and it is shocking that it hasn’t led to even more rapid cultural change than it has. One also needs to separate generalized cultural knowledge from individual knowledge. As people mature, they should tend to individuate and discover “what works for them” vs “what works for society”. That individual knowledge can be bootstrapped on cultural knowledge, but ultimately we may each need to reject aspects of our culture in order to discover our unique path.
- rayiner 3y ago
  > That individual knowledge can be bootstrapped on cultural knowledge, but ultimately we may each need to reject aspects of our culture in order to discover our unique path. But we’re not unique individuals. We’re 8 billion copies of two sexes of human animal, and pretty much everyone falls into a handful of archetypes and social roles.
  - orasis 3y ago
    Seeking to collapse the unique contexts and interplay between 8 billion individuals is incredibly dangerous, leading to things like command-and-control economies, socialism, and genecide. The information surface area and processing power of 8 billion people far exceeds the few bits representing your “handful of archetypes and social roles”. Anyone who believes that Western civilization has been largely functional should soundly reject these ideas and agree that individuation is a fundamentally Good Thing.
    - rayiner 3y ago
      Western civilization is literally in the middle of wiping itself out. People have become so individualistic and self-absorbed that they cannot even perpetuate their own civilization and need to import people from the Middle East and Africa to avoid disappearing. The phrase “jump the shark” comes to mind.
      - 3y ago
carapace 3y ago
> organized religion, marriage, sexual norms, social duty, gender roles, and cultural traditions Well, most of that is highly variable and contingent, local. Ask an anthropologist, they'll tell you. Personally, I don't think one should prescribe the "one true" form of family for other people. The question you raise in my mind is "What are you going to do to the non-conformists?"
- zelse 3y ago
  This is indeed /exactly/ what I wondered once people started quoting St. Paul, and as a historian, the implications aren't great.
AlexandrB 3y ago
> Dismissing a multi-millenia multi-cultural fundamental norm This norm was not evenly distributed. Generally, if you were a peasant (and especially a woman), you were expected to adhere to the norms rigidly. While those with means or power frequently got to flaunt them or even started their own religions to get around them[1]. To me it just looks like another lever of control for the powerful over the "plebs". [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_England https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_England
- gmadsen 3y ago
  society doesn't function if everyone is as ammoral as the elites
hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
> Dismissing a multi-millenia multi-cultural fundamental norm as "indoctrination" severely downplays the collective learning of uncountable generations At many points in time this quote could easily apply to monogamous marriage, men having multiple wives and/or concubines, and consanguineous marriage.
worklaptopacct 3y ago
I was raised Catholic and I would summarize the faith as it was passed to me as an exercise in envy. Even the premise of your quote is the same: "Your puny ways of life are vain and laughable, because you do not want to listen to me and do as I tell you". Pad this into a few verses, flower it up with medieval language - and your God is speaking. Discussion not welcome, because only I, as a believer, can understand the arcane nuance of my verses. Bow down and submit. Referring to the other comment about human morals evolving - religion is evolving as well, although it learned to cover it up. Catholicism is my favorite here, because it's perfected the art of bullshitting itself. For example, divorce is not allowed - but if you look for "evidence" that the partner has misled you into a marriage, then we call it "Marriage never happened" and boom - your not-a-divorce has been granted. Abortion suddenly in the spotlight? It's because our understanding has evolved and it's only now that we see that it's never been acceptable. And so on.

flerchin 3y ago

Your argument was stronger before your quote of scripture, or whatever it was.

paulddraper 3y ago
I don't want to plagiarize, but I can't think of a better descriptor of the cultural zeitgeist than "ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." (St Paul)
- defrost 3y ago
  > Social iconoclasts dismiss organized religion, marriage, sexual norms, social duty, gender roles, and cultural traditions. It's important to recognise that western organised religion stomped on a great many multi-millenia gender roles and cultural traditions about the globe via colonisation. Promoting what might made right as "the norm" severely downplays the alternative collective learning of uncountable generations.
  - gedy 3y ago
    > It's important to recognise that western organised religion stomped on a great many multi-millenia gender roles and cultural traditions about the globe via colonisation. Sure, but let's be honest that the majority of humanity stabilized around a man and woman having children in a monogamous relationship, with a minority practicing polygamy. The rest were tiny outliers numbers wise. That's not quite the blank slate that some people imply humans are, imho.
    - rayiner 3y ago
      [flagged]
  - rayiner 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - defrost 3y ago
      Check your history, really. Polygamy has been widespread throughout history, eg: In accordance with the marriage-customs of the Egyptians the priests have but one wife, but any other man takes as many as he may determine; and the Egyptians are required to raise all their children in order to increase the population, on the ground that large numbers are the greatest factor in increasing the prosperity of both country and cities. Diodorus Siculus It's been widespread throughout the western christian church also - Popes weren't the only ones with multiple families. > What grinds my gears about this is that it’s always some white American invoking the moral sanction of unspecified black and brown people. What grinds my gears is the sheer number of idiots that assume the internet is made up of white American males. Some of us were tagging along on logistics runs and meeting the Minangkabau, the Bugis, the Fore, and many many other people in the 1960s. To the best of my recollection Paul Gauguin wasn't hanging out in Tahiti for the grinding monogamy. Still, it's hard to bame people in a post missionary world for having culturally blinkered views formed by the pinhole of white saviour pamphlets.
      - rayiner 3y ago

irrational 3y ago

Is it a norm? I view all forms of having more than one significant other as being forms of poly. Office spouse, mistress, side boyfriend, sexting other people, etc. I think poly relationships are very common. If you want to quote from the Bible: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. So even looking at porn or thinking sexual thoughts about anyone else is engaging in a poly relationship. By that standard, nearly everyone is in a poly relationship.

xyzelement 3y ago
I think you are conflating succumbing to a vice (eg porn) and orienting your life around an identity (eg poly)
- CobrastanJorji 3y ago
  Interestingly, Catholicism sees the former (doing the bad thing but agreeing that it is bad and that you should stop) as pretty normal, but the latter (deciding the thing is okay) as heresy, the sort of thing that could get you the bell, book, and candle.
  - paulddraper 3y ago
    Yes. This is the Christian concept of faith and grace. "For by grace you have been saved through faith." Because of Christ's grace, your belief is sufficient even if your acts are not.
    - tasuki 3y ago
      I don't understand what you're saying. Don't you find it weird that doing the bad thing but agreeing that it is bad is... okay, while deciding the thing is okay is... heresy?
      - true_religion 3y ago

maeil 3y ago

> There is a common view of cultural norms as at worst tyrannical or at best random and arbitrary, rather than the sophisticated and curated product of billions of human lives. > Social iconoclasts dismiss organized religion, marriage, sexual norms, social duty, gender roles, and cultural traditions. Some of the cultural norms you named there are millions of years old and show little variance across cultures and time. Others only a few millennia old at best and show very high variance.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

JambalayaJim 3y ago

> There is a common view of cultural norms as at worst tyrannical or at best random and arbitrary, rather than the sophisticated and curated product of billions of human lives. Examine any of these “fundamental norms” and see that they were not so fundamental after all. With their narratives built to enforce cultural norms today, not genuinely explore lessons from the past. My grandma will _insist_ that homosexuality simply didn’t exist when she was younger. This is the “sophisticated” product you speak of - a blatant denial of reality.

lazide 3y ago
Nothing says fun times like pretending denial is a new - or only an old thing. There are tradeoffs to every path, many only visible long after the path is taken. It’s easy to reject the old path because the tradeoffs are visible and it’s clearly not perfect. That doesn’t mean the new path is going to be better - just less known.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

zrezzed 3y ago

> Dismissing a multi-millenia multi-cultural fundamental norm as "indoctrination" severely downplays the collective learning of uncountable generations. I agree in this case, but only because I think marriage is an institution that we’ve learned needs (sometimes strong) active endorsement and it’s pro-social. My view is that cultural norms are at worst tyrannical and at best the essence of being human. > Social iconoclasts dismiss organized religion, marriage, sexual norms, social duty, gender roles, and cultural traditions. This is just true. But this is all of us: we all have a relationship with society around us and dismiss parts of it. As we should.

kibwen 3y ago

> the collective learning of uncountable generations Wisdom in one context can be foolishness in another. To live a good life it is necessary to re-evaluate the actions of your forebears and determine if it is still applicable to your modern context. That doesn't make someone a "social iconoclast", it makes them wise. Our ancestors did the same thing to their ancestors. Homo sapiens is 300,000 years old, and our societies have changed a lot since then, and will continue to change. Note that I personally have no desire to be anything other than monogamous, but I know several people (both young and elderly) who are successfully polyamorous. I also know people who have catastrophically failed at polyamory; but then, of course, I also know people who have catastrophically failed at monogamy. As far as I'm concerned, normalizing polyamory will strengthen monogamy. It seems like some people out there just aren't cut out for monogamy, and in a monogamous world they inevitably become cheaters. Let the polyamorous people remove themselves from the monogamous dating pool and you will exclusively remove people who would otherwise be compelled to cheat.

orasis 3y ago
I like this take. Already you see specialization of dating apps toward different relationship styles, with Hinge more focused on Monogamy, Tinder on the casual/singles crowd, and Feeld for the nonmonogamous. I agree this is decidedly positive for the monogamous folks. There is now less risk of them connecting with and falling in love with someone who isn’t a good match.
rayiner 3y ago
In your example, there’s a group of people who aren’t cut out for monogamy and are a problem for society no matter what. But I think there’s a much larger group of people that could do it in a society that offers them strong support and reinforcement, who will fail and flounder in a society that leaves them free to make choices. In my culture, neither divorce nor cheating are socially acceptable. Now, I’m happily married to my wife. But I’m also aware that I had better do everything I can to make my marriage happy, because that’s it. My social standing would be devastated if I got divorced. People would be talking about me in hushed tones 12,000 miles away.
- 3y ago

orasis 3y ago

Note that these cultural norms evolved prior to modern birth control, STI testing/treatment, and peak population. Birth control is a radical invention and it is shocking that it hasn’t led to even more rapid cultural change than it has. One also needs to separate generalized cultural knowledge from individual knowledge. As people mature, they should tend to individuate and discover “what works for them” vs “what works for society”. That individual knowledge can be bootstrapped on cultural knowledge, but ultimately we may each need to reject aspects of our culture in order to discover our unique path.

rayiner 3y ago
> That individual knowledge can be bootstrapped on cultural knowledge, but ultimately we may each need to reject aspects of our culture in order to discover our unique path. But we’re not unique individuals. We’re 8 billion copies of two sexes of human animal, and pretty much everyone falls into a handful of archetypes and social roles.
- orasis 3y ago
  Seeking to collapse the unique contexts and interplay between 8 billion individuals is incredibly dangerous, leading to things like command-and-control economies, socialism, and genecide. The information surface area and processing power of 8 billion people far exceeds the few bits representing your “handful of archetypes and social roles”. Anyone who believes that Western civilization has been largely functional should soundly reject these ideas and agree that individuation is a fundamentally Good Thing.
  - rayiner 3y ago
    Western civilization is literally in the middle of wiping itself out. People have become so individualistic and self-absorbed that they cannot even perpetuate their own civilization and need to import people from the Middle East and Africa to avoid disappearing. The phrase “jump the shark” comes to mind.
    - 3y ago

carapace 3y ago

> organized religion, marriage, sexual norms, social duty, gender roles, and cultural traditions Well, most of that is highly variable and contingent, local. Ask an anthropologist, they'll tell you. Personally, I don't think one should prescribe the "one true" form of family for other people. The question you raise in my mind is "What are you going to do to the non-conformists?"

zelse 3y ago
This is indeed /exactly/ what I wondered once people started quoting St. Paul, and as a historian, the implications aren't great.

AlexandrB 3y ago

> Dismissing a multi-millenia multi-cultural fundamental norm This norm was not evenly distributed. Generally, if you were a peasant (and especially a woman), you were expected to adhere to the norms rigidly. While those with means or power frequently got to flaunt them or even started their own religions to get around them[1]. To me it just looks like another lever of control for the powerful over the "plebs". [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_England https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_England

gmadsen 3y ago
society doesn't function if everyone is as ammoral as the elites

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago

> Dismissing a multi-millenia multi-cultural fundamental norm as "indoctrination" severely downplays the collective learning of uncountable generations At many points in time this quote could easily apply to monogamous marriage, men having multiple wives and/or concubines, and consanguineous marriage.

worklaptopacct 3y ago

I was raised Catholic and I would summarize the faith as it was passed to me as an exercise in envy. Even the premise of your quote is the same: "Your puny ways of life are vain and laughable, because you do not want to listen to me and do as I tell you". Pad this into a few verses, flower it up with medieval language - and your God is speaking. Discussion not welcome, because only I, as a believer, can understand the arcane nuance of my verses. Bow down and submit. Referring to the other comment about human morals evolving - religion is evolving as well, although it learned to cover it up. Catholicism is my favorite here, because it's perfected the art of bullshitting itself. For example, divorce is not allowed - but if you look for "evidence" that the partner has misled you into a marriage, then we call it "Marriage never happened" and boom - your not-a-divorce has been granted. Abortion suddenly in the spotlight? It's because our understanding has evolved and it's only now that we see that it's never been acceptable. And so on.