4 ms·

Respectability politics and semantic arguments aside "Consider what this has resulted in in practice ..." Who cares? Has this actually impacted your life in a

by hmcq6 3y ago

Respectability politics and semantic arguments aside "Consider what this has resulted in in practice ..." Who cares? Has this actually impacted your life in any way or are you just making a slippery slope argument? "Western values ..." you're just talking to hear yourself talk man. Despite me, indirectly, asking 3 times now I've yet to be provided any kind of evidence connecting "Western Values" to the good things you want to give "Western Values" credit for. So we can't even get to the next step of testing your theory because you won't explain any further. My next step would be to ask you how you grapple with the fact that "Western Values" also brought slavery to the Americas. But I see no point in asking insightful questions because you haven't even articulated whatever connection you think exists between the two concepts. "There is no excuse for this, and it needs to stop." Why? Why is it so wrong to inspect our philosophical frameworks or subjective values? Why does that behavior need to stop?

ETH_start 3y ago
I certainly care if my country becomes more dysfunctional by abandoning merit — in ideas, values, and job applicants — for ideological narratives. These are real-world consequences. Abandoning merit leads, in turn, to dysfunction, which lowers quality of life. That we should try to avoid this is self-evident. Ideas have a tangible impact. Take the scientific revolution. It was a product of Western thinking, and has undeniably advanced global health and technology. This isn't just an abstract claim; these are tangible advancements in the human condition. As for slavery, it existed in the Americas among indigenous peoples before European colonization. While Western expansion was associated with certain negative practices, Western societies were also instrumental in ending slavery as a globally tolerated institution. Highlighting the positive does not imply denying the negative. It implies pursuing an impartial assessment to determine the net impact of Western values. And my stance isn't against inspecting our philosophical frameworks; it's about ensuring impartiality that looks at achievements and flaws equally so as to not understate the merit of Western values.
- hmcq6 3y ago
  You're moving the goalposts again. Or is this the motte-and-bailey? --- you: "Capitalism ended slavery and genocide" me: "No it didn't" you: "What I meant to say is that Western Values influenced global consensus" --- you: "Punctuality being deemphasized is bad" me: "How has punctuality being deemphasized impacted you personally?" you: "Abandoning merit leads to dysfunction" --- And you can not seriously be offering up the pretense of impartiality? "Highlighting the positive does not imply denying the negative." Ok but highlighting the positive is by definition not impartial. Impartiality would be offering up the facts and letting others interpret those facts to come to their own conclusions. You're offering up a biased conclusion and working backwards with very few supporting facts. "And my stance isn't against inspecting our philosophical frameworks;" ... let me repost the longer quote "In no other region of the world is the intellectual class arguing that their own culture's values should be deemphasized, and that includes regions that are behind the West in a myriad of socioeconomic metrics. There is no excuse for this, and it needs to stop." Arguing that ones own culture's values should be deemphasized is inspecting your philosophical framework from an objective point of view. It is literally the process of removing subjectivity from the established merit system. And you said it "has to stop".
  - ETH_start 3y ago
    I brought the discussion back to the original topic, after your inflammatory "crypto bro" comment took it down a different track. As I explained: Before we digress too far, let's remember that this discussion originated from a debate about colonialism and, more fundamentally, the merit of Western values. The link submitted is critical of the notion of the superiority of Western ideas and values in academia. My aim is to stay true to my original point about the overall impact of Western values. Regarding punctuality and merit, my concern is the broader implications, not necessarily immediate personal impact. It's about long-term societal effects. As for impartiality, highlighting positives doesn't imply bias. It’s about balancing the one-sided take of the decolonization movement. Also, being impartial doesn't require us to stop striving for our society's progress, nor does it oblige us to view all cultures as having equal impact on a society's material development. Recognizing that cultures are not all equally worthy of being emphasized is not bias—it's a practical observation that different cultural values will shape societies in different ways, and that some ways are preferable to others. I stand by my statement on the unique trend in Western academia to question its own foundational values. It’s one thing to critique and evolve; it's another to deemphasize without recognizing the positive contributions alongside the negatives. An impartial analysis would, I contend, conclude that certain Western values are exceptionally conducive to a well functioning society, and deserve the emphasis they currently receive.

by hmcq6 3y ago

ETH_start 3y ago

I certainly care if my country becomes more dysfunctional by abandoning merit — in ideas, values, and job applicants — for ideological narratives. These are real-world consequences. Abandoning merit leads, in turn, to dysfunction, which lowers quality of life. That we should try to avoid this is self-evident. Ideas have a tangible impact. Take the scientific revolution. It was a product of Western thinking, and has undeniably advanced global health and technology. This isn't just an abstract claim; these are tangible advancements in the human condition. As for slavery, it existed in the Americas among indigenous peoples before European colonization. While Western expansion was associated with certain negative practices, Western societies were also instrumental in ending slavery as a globally tolerated institution. Highlighting the positive does not imply denying the negative. It implies pursuing an impartial assessment to determine the net impact of Western values. And my stance isn't against inspecting our philosophical frameworks; it's about ensuring impartiality that looks at achievements and flaws equally so as to not understate the merit of Western values.

hmcq6 3y ago
You're moving the goalposts again. Or is this the motte-and-bailey? --- you: "Capitalism ended slavery and genocide" me: "No it didn't" you: "What I meant to say is that Western Values influenced global consensus" --- you: "Punctuality being deemphasized is bad" me: "How has punctuality being deemphasized impacted you personally?" you: "Abandoning merit leads to dysfunction" --- And you can not seriously be offering up the pretense of impartiality? "Highlighting the positive does not imply denying the negative." Ok but highlighting the positive is by definition not impartial. Impartiality would be offering up the facts and letting others interpret those facts to come to their own conclusions. You're offering up a biased conclusion and working backwards with very few supporting facts. "And my stance isn't against inspecting our philosophical frameworks;" ... let me repost the longer quote "In no other region of the world is the intellectual class arguing that their own culture's values should be deemphasized, and that includes regions that are behind the West in a myriad of socioeconomic metrics. There is no excuse for this, and it needs to stop." Arguing that ones own culture's values should be deemphasized is inspecting your philosophical framework from an objective point of view. It is literally the process of removing subjectivity from the established merit system. And you said it "has to stop".
- ETH_start 3y ago
  I brought the discussion back to the original topic, after your inflammatory "crypto bro" comment took it down a different track. As I explained: Before we digress too far, let's remember that this discussion originated from a debate about colonialism and, more fundamentally, the merit of Western values. The link submitted is critical of the notion of the superiority of Western ideas and values in academia. My aim is to stay true to my original point about the overall impact of Western values. Regarding punctuality and merit, my concern is the broader implications, not necessarily immediate personal impact. It's about long-term societal effects. As for impartiality, highlighting positives doesn't imply bias. It’s about balancing the one-sided take of the decolonization movement. Also, being impartial doesn't require us to stop striving for our society's progress, nor does it oblige us to view all cultures as having equal impact on a society's material development. Recognizing that cultures are not all equally worthy of being emphasized is not bias—it's a practical observation that different cultural values will shape societies in different ways, and that some ways are preferable to others. I stand by my statement on the unique trend in Western academia to question its own foundational values. It’s one thing to critique and evolve; it's another to deemphasize without recognizing the positive contributions alongside the negatives. An impartial analysis would, I contend, conclude that certain Western values are exceptionally conducive to a well functioning society, and deserve the emphasis they currently receive.