4 ms·

This is one of the reasons that I think Kant's ideas on Deontology (also Confucian philosophy around relationships) is the correct one for a functioning society

This is one of the reasons that I think Kant's ideas on Deontology (also Confucian philosophy around relationships) is the correct one for a functioning society. There is a framework of "Right" and "Wrong" that exists outside of "Good" and "Bad". Doing what is beneficial for society, and what is expected of society is right, regardless of the Good nature of it. If society expects you to fight in a war, and you kill someone, that is "Right" regardless of the fact that killing is "bad". But to bring this back to the topic on hand. It is right to study and work hard at school, it is right to be disciplined and not disrupt class, it is right to work a job and do well at the job. This is separate from the fact that you are may be a good person (nice, charitable, etc). A teenager who is good, but not working hard is being wrong. A large part of this is putting wants aside to do what is right.

TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
It’s pretty much collectivism vs individualism. The West has mostly leaned towards individualism (aka “it's a free country”) while the East Asia under the influence of Confucianism is most collective. Collectivism has its downsides. It can be suffocating. Society also doesn’t always take into consideration an individual’s limitations when it comes to meeting societal obligations - a moot point in more individualistic societies.
- rayiner 3y ago
  > Collectivism has its downsides. Collectivism also has upsides. I’m fascinated by Mormons because they seem to me to be the most Asian white people. Mormon men have a life expectancy almost 10 years longer than other white men. They have among the highest social mobility in the country. They, along with Jews, top the charts in measures of mental well being. And this is all happening within the context of America. They deal with the same Obamacare, seem to have basically the same school systems, etc.
  - MandieD 3y ago
    Strong, socially-enforced taboos against alcohol and tobacco consumption are probably a major driver of the longevity difference.
    - ekanes 3y ago
      And a small community of actual friends. Friendship matters re longevity. It's worth working towards.
      - 16mb 3y ago
        I assume it’s a bit more likely to do with the lack of junk foods and increased physical activity.
        rayiner 3y ago
        Yeah but everyone knows you shouldn’t eat junk food and should exercise more. And last I checked Utah is subject to the same consumer advertising, fast food chains, and processed food brands as everywhere else.
        kelseyfrog 3y ago
        I assume that the benefactors of a patriarchy do rather well. It naturally confers many advantages that translate into longer lifespan.
        rayiner 3y ago
        Mormon women also live much longer than other white American women. Mormon women live longer than Swedish women.
    - coryfklein 3y ago
      Having been raised Mormon and participating in the church and culture until my mid-20's, there are sooo many aspects of the religion that affect life across so many dimensions. I'm sure abstinence from drugs is benificial, but probably only account for a fraction of the effect. Other things I'd consider: * Longevity is associated with community, something the church is very good at * Even elderly individuals are required to perform "a calling", giving them meaning and purpose later in life * Mormons have a lot of children, and so when you're older you usually have a very strong social safety net * Mormons have lower divorce rates, and divorce is correlated with greater mortality As an agnostic and raising kids, I spend a lot of time now pondering how – if at all – to pass on as many of these benefits of Mormonism to my kids without mandating the magical beliefs, and I have to say it's difficult. But I think you do have to have some healthy middle-ground mix of conservatism and collectivisms just to strike a healthy balance with modern individualism and liberalism.
- throwaway2037 3y ago
  The West has mostly leaned towards individualism (aka “it's a free country”) while the East Asia under the influence of Confucianism is most collective. This is ridiculous. Look at the divorce rates here: https://wisevoter.com/country-rankings/divorce-rate-by-country/ https://wisevoter.com/country-rankings/divorce-rate-by-count... Mainland China has a surprisingly high divorce rate. How do you explain why Canada has a divorce rate less than one half of the United States? Japan and the Netherlands have roughly the same divorce rates, and wildly different cultures.
  - TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
    Things have changed over the decades. Those countries have become more individualistic and divorce is less taboo among the current generation than the Boomers.
bluish29 3y ago
The consequences of the society decide what is right has very bad consequences i.e [1]. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eichmann_in_Jerusalem https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eichmann_in_Jerusalem
- lazide 3y ago
  So does every individual deciding what is right independent of others [https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/americas-deadliest-serial-killers/ https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/americas-deadliest-serial-k...].
anon291 3y ago
Deontology is the typical endorsed philosophy of most Christian ethics. I only point this out because by citing confucianism you make it seem as if this philosophy has no place in the west. But it does.
picadores 3y ago
Its wrong to disturb societal harmony, by example: putting the guild of map printers out of work with a digital map from sattelites available on all devices.
timeagain 3y ago
Saying killing in war is “right” is putting a lot of words in this dead German guys mouth. Kant thought something was “right” if everyone doing it would not lead to contradiction. Killing is a common example of what is wrong, since if everyone killed no one would remain. In the 70s I would have been imprisoned for being gay, was that “right” because society deems it so?
- hattmall 3y ago
  >In the 70s I would have been imprisoned for being gay, was that “right” because society deems it so? It seems like that would be a yes, because it's doing what you want, following your natural desires, against the will / benefit of society. Then by your own logic >Killing is a common example of what is wrong, since if everyone killed no one would remain. At the most basic concept, if everyone was gay then society / humans would cease to exist after the final generation. You can even step back and say if everyone just gave into the basic sexual desires society would be worse off. it's sort of what the article implies. Ultimately the single women with kids is because people aren't doing what society deems right and having long-term monogamous relationships. We see the effect is that the children ultimately have worse outcomes. So it seems clear that the answer to your question would be yes, but of course you can go further and say, is "prison" ever right? Or right in that case?
  - seec 3y ago
    It is a bit sad you got downvoted because what you say follows logic and that's all there is to it. The gay people have won the ideology war and got strong political support right now, but truthfully being gay is not something that should be encouraged or supported because as you say, in the long term it has unbelievably bad outcome for the survival of our species. It is the same for single mothers, and my belief formed by my own experience, is that they bear lots of responsibility for the bad outcomes, but you can't say so... My own mother decided to separate from my father for her own profit, to be able to do whatever she wanted to do, whenever she wanted to. She proceeded to neglect my brother and I at the most crucial time of our growth and simultaneously blamed my father for everything. Both my brother and I have suffered bad outcomes, considering the potential and other variables. And that is with her being a pretty high-income woman (top 10% consistently). Now I am at a time in my life where I'm starting to look back on history and various facts resurface that make me understand things in a new light. I am at the point where I wonder how such an irresponsible woman even got allowed to have all the power other us. There is something extremely wrong with our current society where women are allowed all the rights with none of the responsibility. In my opinion, such news/statistic is just the tip of the iceberg, it is something really easy to observe with no study anyway (you need the study because otherwise you will be called all kind of name for daring to hold women to any kind of standard). The problems run much deeper than that and it is way too late to do much; it will take major events to bring meaningful change.
slibhb 3y ago
> This is one of the reasons that I think Kant's ideas on Deontology (also Confucian philosophy around relationships) is the correct one for a functioning society. There is a framework of "Right" and "Wrong" that exists outside of "Good" and "Bad". Doing what is beneficial for society, and what is expected of society is right, regardless of the Good nature of it. If society expects you to fight in a war, and you kill someone, that is "Right" regardless of the fact that killing is "bad". This is a tangent but I've never heard anyone summarize Kant this way. For Kant, "right" is a subset of "good". So there is no right action that is not good. In other words, per Kant, it's absolutely not acceptable for you to do something bad because it's "necessary" according to whatever metric.

TerrifiedMouse 3y ago

It’s pretty much collectivism vs individualism. The West has mostly leaned towards individualism (aka “it's a free country”) while the East Asia under the influence of Confucianism is most collective. Collectivism has its downsides. It can be suffocating. Society also doesn’t always take into consideration an individual’s limitations when it comes to meeting societal obligations - a moot point in more individualistic societies.

rayiner 3y ago
> Collectivism has its downsides. Collectivism also has upsides. I’m fascinated by Mormons because they seem to me to be the most Asian white people. Mormon men have a life expectancy almost 10 years longer than other white men. They have among the highest social mobility in the country. They, along with Jews, top the charts in measures of mental well being. And this is all happening within the context of America. They deal with the same Obamacare, seem to have basically the same school systems, etc.
- MandieD 3y ago
  Strong, socially-enforced taboos against alcohol and tobacco consumption are probably a major driver of the longevity difference.
  - ekanes 3y ago
    And a small community of actual friends. Friendship matters re longevity. It's worth working towards.
    - 16mb 3y ago
      I assume it’s a bit more likely to do with the lack of junk foods and increased physical activity.
      - rayiner 3y ago
        Yeah but everyone knows you shouldn’t eat junk food and should exercise more. And last I checked Utah is subject to the same consumer advertising, fast food chains, and processed food brands as everywhere else.
      - kelseyfrog 3y ago
        I assume that the benefactors of a patriarchy do rather well. It naturally confers many advantages that translate into longer lifespan.
        rayiner 3y ago
        Mormon women also live much longer than other white American women. Mormon women live longer than Swedish women.
  - coryfklein 3y ago
    Having been raised Mormon and participating in the church and culture until my mid-20's, there are sooo many aspects of the religion that affect life across so many dimensions. I'm sure abstinence from drugs is benificial, but probably only account for a fraction of the effect. Other things I'd consider: * Longevity is associated with community, something the church is very good at * Even elderly individuals are required to perform "a calling", giving them meaning and purpose later in life * Mormons have a lot of children, and so when you're older you usually have a very strong social safety net * Mormons have lower divorce rates, and divorce is correlated with greater mortality As an agnostic and raising kids, I spend a lot of time now pondering how – if at all – to pass on as many of these benefits of Mormonism to my kids without mandating the magical beliefs, and I have to say it's difficult. But I think you do have to have some healthy middle-ground mix of conservatism and collectivisms just to strike a healthy balance with modern individualism and liberalism.
throwaway2037 3y ago
The West has mostly leaned towards individualism (aka “it's a free country”) while the East Asia under the influence of Confucianism is most collective. This is ridiculous. Look at the divorce rates here: https://wisevoter.com/country-rankings/divorce-rate-by-country/ https://wisevoter.com/country-rankings/divorce-rate-by-count... Mainland China has a surprisingly high divorce rate. How do you explain why Canada has a divorce rate less than one half of the United States? Japan and the Netherlands have roughly the same divorce rates, and wildly different cultures.
- TerrifiedMouse 3y ago
  Things have changed over the decades. Those countries have become more individualistic and divorce is less taboo among the current generation than the Boomers.

bluish29 3y ago

The consequences of the society decide what is right has very bad consequences i.e [1]. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eichmann_in_Jerusalem https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eichmann_in_Jerusalem

lazide 3y ago
So does every individual deciding what is right independent of others [https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/americas-deadliest-serial-killers/ https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/americas-deadliest-serial-k...].

anon291 3y ago

Deontology is the typical endorsed philosophy of most Christian ethics. I only point this out because by citing confucianism you make it seem as if this philosophy has no place in the west. But it does.

picadores 3y ago

Its wrong to disturb societal harmony, by example: putting the guild of map printers out of work with a digital map from sattelites available on all devices.

timeagain 3y ago

Saying killing in war is “right” is putting a lot of words in this dead German guys mouth. Kant thought something was “right” if everyone doing it would not lead to contradiction. Killing is a common example of what is wrong, since if everyone killed no one would remain. In the 70s I would have been imprisoned for being gay, was that “right” because society deems it so?

hattmall 3y ago
>In the 70s I would have been imprisoned for being gay, was that “right” because society deems it so? It seems like that would be a yes, because it's doing what you want, following your natural desires, against the will / benefit of society. Then by your own logic >Killing is a common example of what is wrong, since if everyone killed no one would remain. At the most basic concept, if everyone was gay then society / humans would cease to exist after the final generation. You can even step back and say if everyone just gave into the basic sexual desires society would be worse off. it's sort of what the article implies. Ultimately the single women with kids is because people aren't doing what society deems right and having long-term monogamous relationships. We see the effect is that the children ultimately have worse outcomes. So it seems clear that the answer to your question would be yes, but of course you can go further and say, is "prison" ever right? Or right in that case?
- seec 3y ago
  It is a bit sad you got downvoted because what you say follows logic and that's all there is to it. The gay people have won the ideology war and got strong political support right now, but truthfully being gay is not something that should be encouraged or supported because as you say, in the long term it has unbelievably bad outcome for the survival of our species. It is the same for single mothers, and my belief formed by my own experience, is that they bear lots of responsibility for the bad outcomes, but you can't say so... My own mother decided to separate from my father for her own profit, to be able to do whatever she wanted to do, whenever she wanted to. She proceeded to neglect my brother and I at the most crucial time of our growth and simultaneously blamed my father for everything. Both my brother and I have suffered bad outcomes, considering the potential and other variables. And that is with her being a pretty high-income woman (top 10% consistently). Now I am at a time in my life where I'm starting to look back on history and various facts resurface that make me understand things in a new light. I am at the point where I wonder how such an irresponsible woman even got allowed to have all the power other us. There is something extremely wrong with our current society where women are allowed all the rights with none of the responsibility. In my opinion, such news/statistic is just the tip of the iceberg, it is something really easy to observe with no study anyway (you need the study because otherwise you will be called all kind of name for daring to hold women to any kind of standard). The problems run much deeper than that and it is way too late to do much; it will take major events to bring meaningful change.

slibhb 3y ago

> This is one of the reasons that I think Kant's ideas on Deontology (also Confucian philosophy around relationships) is the correct one for a functioning society. There is a framework of "Right" and "Wrong" that exists outside of "Good" and "Bad". Doing what is beneficial for society, and what is expected of society is right, regardless of the Good nature of it. If society expects you to fight in a war, and you kill someone, that is "Right" regardless of the fact that killing is "bad". This is a tangent but I've never heard anyone summarize Kant this way. For Kant, "right" is a subset of "good". So there is no right action that is not good. In other words, per Kant, it's absolutely not acceptable for you to do something bad because it's "necessary" according to whatever metric.