/kind/ - kind

No bully! Be kind!

Max message length: 4096

Drag files to upload or
click here to select them

Maximum 3 files / Maximum size: 10.00 MB

More

(used to delete files and postings)


Open file (69.70 KB 410x600 the dream.jpg)
a kinder world... Friend 07/07/2021 (Wed) 08:37:07 No.1186
as of now, a lot of bad things happen in this world. for example, violent wars still happen, many people lead unhappy lives, and many governments have problems with violent crime and corruption. but in the future, do you think we could eventually resolve those problems and actually live in a kinder, happier, and dare i say it, a more perfect world?
Could happen, but could get worse instead. Caring for others is beneficial on a larger scale, but scapegoats and strict hierarchies are useful tools for the power-hungry. Many dictators and wannabe-dictators have popped up recently. Plus, many nations are not ready for kindness at all. There, it's not just the power hungry, it's vast majority who doesn't want to be good people. A lot would have to change for this to improve, starting with religion. Sad reminder that psychopaths are more likely to end up bosses of large companies, high-ranking politicians, religious leaders. Psychopaths completely lack the empathy needed to be a good person, they can only fake it for their own gain, never understand it.
>>1186 See the two runs of the Global Change Game from Bob Altemeyer's The Authoritarians, one with high right-wing authoritarian follower (RWAF) scores in charge and the other with low RWAF scores in charge, and their very different outcomes. One of the measures that would improve things is filtering out the high RWAF scores from any position of authority. https://theauthoritarians.org/ Ceasing to teach children to fear and hate those who are different for the purpose of divide et impera would also help. > <input type="file" name="files" id="inputFiles" multiple="" class="fileBrowser" accept="image/png, image/jpeg, image/gif, image/bmp, video/webm, audio/mpeg, video/mp4, video/ogg, audio/ogg, audio/webm"> Epubs are not allowed currently so I can't attach the book. http://0x0.st/-fdq.epub
Open file (81.63 KB 253x227 1611613121882.png)
I don't think so. I don't want to make a depressing thread but I don't think so. The reasons are too political so I'd prefer not get into it too much, but here's a snippet of it: >>1189 >Ceasing to teach children to fear and hate those who are different This is impossible because it's wired in our biology to be wary of things that are different from ourselves. It's effectively a survival instinct, and you can't just pretend it doesn't exist. Just like you can't pretend that black people aren't on average more violent than say asian people. That doesn't mean black people are inherently violent or asian people are inherently peaceful, but there's a biological difference there that doesn't go away if you ignore it. The only path to a truly /kind/ world is to properly acknowledge ALL of these differences and do whatever necessary to best account for it, even if it ultimately means segregation, and unfortunately, even if it means erasing those people who simply won't co-operate with your idea of a peaceful world. For instance some jihadists who constantly seek new weapons to destroy opponents to their un/kind/ religion with. They won't stop just because you give them gifts and ask nicely, and even if they did, how many people on your side will be okay with providing labor and money just to pacify the violent religion with gifts?
>a more perfect world the problem with this entire line of thinking is that perfection and utopian belief are not real. it's not even that it's "impossible," it's more than that. it doesn't and can't exist under any circumstance because the underlying circumstances that would make it so are impossible. who is to say what is perfect for you is perfect for anyone else? morals are absolutely subjective with evidence being that law attempts to legislate morality and pretty much everyone disagrees with various laws or lack of laws. the problem is that I also know that everyone else's opinions on these things are incorrect if they don't align with mine, and I know mine are right, and literally everyone else feels the same about themselves. you could make a serial killer utopia with the morals of a serial killer. a serial killer could argue that the satisfaction him being able to hurt people and the value and pleasure it brings to his life should be valued more than someone else's right to life. serial killers are a minority so we don't do that, but that's literally the only reason why. get a population of over 50% serial killers and that will change especially since they'll just murder anyone who disagrees with them. as far as whether or not you can get rid of corruption, yeah you can, it's possible but it's fucking hard as shit and unlikely because it requires a lot of action from a lot of people at once, and people are more concerned about things a few hours ahead of them like what they'd like to eat for dinner. so no I don't think anyone will do a fucking thing. fantasize all you want but don't get hung up on it especially since probably nobody on this board or even this planet agrees with you 100% on anything so your utopia is already fucked.
>>1190 >This is impossible >it's impossible not to teach something
>>1189 >Ceasing to teach children to fear and hate those who are different >>1192 >it's impossible not to teach something these are also basically strawmans because children are not taught to hate generally speaking. find someone who was actually taught as a child to hate people. it's a delusion, it's a made up fairy tale, it doesn't happen. it's very similar (but not quite the same) to something that is happening in a few places in the west (notably america) in that idiots believe anti-rape education is all it will take to stop people from raping. literally every single person who commits rape knows that the vast majority of people think that rape is a heinous immoral act. they do it anyway. telling them "don't rape" is not going to make them say "oh wow holy fuck I didn't know, rape is BAD? okay sorry I won't rape, thanks for educating me!" this "education" attitude is founded on the delusion that children are taught to rape or never aware that rape is bad. that's retarded. there's not a single person who doesn't know this, especially rapists. it's why rapists try to get away with it, because they know they could be put in prison for it. the same goes for "hate" in that everyone knows it is socially unacceptable. people hate anyway. education will not get rid of feelings that people have. you can "educate" me all you want that I should not be sexually attracted to females, but it will change literally nothing. you can "educate" me that I should not eat food, but it will change nothing. people have their reasons for hate that come from experience and natural human emotions that humans have had since the fucking dawn of humans.
allow me to elaborate on that last post by the way. "education" only works when the education is just teaching someone about facts. "this is how this works, this is how you do this." people will generally retain that information but sometimes, even factual education doesn't even work. the other kind of "education" is not real education because it is just a bunch of people trying to push their opinions on you and call it "education." this is not actual education, this is actually quite literally the definition of indoctrination. one of the most common ones is "don't do drugs." if you were born in the last few decades you had "don't do drugs" nailed into your skull so hard that it probably drove you crazy. tons of us did drugs anyway. it changed nothing.
>>1193 >these are also basically strawmans because children are not taught to hate generally speaking. find someone who was actually taught as a child to hate people. Me. I had a lesson where a catholic loon spouted bullshit about gays. Though he only parroted what churches say and what children hear from those. Then there is the whole corrupt culture that passes this on. So no, it's not a strawman. You should stop calling things "delusion", it only makes you look unreasonable and completely certain of something provably wrong.
>>1195 it's a delusion. most people are not raised being taught hate. they're hard to find. and just like educating "don't rape" doesn't work, "hate gays" doesn't work either as the majority of people don't give a single shit about gays. why do you think the sons and daughters of klansmen and other groups very often end up going the completely different way of their parents? since you're using yourself as a personal example, I can do the exact same thing. I was "taught" nothing but progressive attitudes my entire upbringing. based on my own personal experiences all of that "education" (indoctrination) I received did absolutely nothing as I became a hardline rightwinger. so yes it is a delusion and please do not take my post as a personal attack, I am not attacking your or anyone personally but I am debating a point.
>>1196 You're strawmanning the whole thing. "Taught hate" doesn't mean that someone tells you to write 10 pages of "fuck neighbors" in your notebook and punishes you for not truly believing what you wrote. >educating "don't rape" doesn't work It does. There are plenty of those who don't understand where rape starts. Most rape isn't assault, explicit rape, but "maybe rape". >the majority of people don't give a single shit about gays In civilized countries, but most of the world isn't civilized. >so yes it is a delusion and please do not take my post as a personal attack You are attacking everyone who disagrees with you and not even bothering to understand what they are saying. And you're attacking them by saying that they're "deluded", which is the newest buzzword for "insane". This is strongly hostile and you can't just say "but I mean nothing offensive by this". Find a more reasonable word and stop using this one, because the only thing you're saying here is that you're angry.
I keep thinking of good points after I've already posted my reply >>1195 >catholic loon spouted bullshit about gays. I can tell that the "education" did nothing to you, it didn't work because you called it bullshit. so with this information I'm actually genuinely not sure why you disagree with me. you had one instance you named of someone trying to indoctrinate you and it didn't work, it basically sounds like I was right. amusingly enough, it seems you also hate as well: "catholic loon" is indicative of that. don't take that personally either as I'm not picking on you, I genuinely do not believe that there is a single person on the planet who has never felt hatred. I hate too, we all do, you're not being singled out. hate and fear are wired into us because they're very real survival tools. say you're a caveman and a snake comes speeding toward you. you don't know which are poisonous or not, but you do know that your cavefriend was killed by a snake. kill it or don't? you probably would kill it. you form your opinions based on your experiences, not because someone told you to hate snakes, not because of education, not because of any of that. it's all experience. caveman you probably now hates snakes because of what a snake did to your friend, and you're not going to bother discerning if it's a friendly snake or not. maybe you'll get everyone in the cave to go out and kill a bunch of nearby snakes to make the area more safe for your family. the cavemen who do not do so, and do not kill the snake may survive, but plenty will not. humans who hated and feared were naturally selected and pushed into the next generations.
>>1197 taught hate means that someone spewed their hateful opinion and you decided to believe it indiscriminately. this mostly doesn't happen. good experiences and bad experience affect your opinions. >It does. need evidence and not from an unrealiable source like online media "vanityfair" or something. need a research article. because there's no way educating someone about the obvious is going to change a thing. maybe we should have murder education too if it actually works. >In civilized countries, but most of the world isn't civilized. sounds like you're talking about a lot of islamic middle eastern and african nations. if you can be completely convinced of something like a power that will smite you for X, Y, or Z then you will probably never do those things. some people may not murder because of that. most people surely don't murder because they don't want to go to prison. but if someone can be convinced that a higher power will hate you and smite you for putting a dick in your butt, how are you exactly supposed to go against the word of a literal holy text by that point? >You are attacking everyone who disagrees with you and not even bothering to understand what they are saying. I'm attacking the idea that "education" (actually indoctrination) is the answer to everything. >And you're attacking them by saying that they're "deluded", which is the newest buzzword for "insane". This is strongly hostile and you can't just say "but I mean nothing offensive by this". >Find a more reasonable word and stop using this one, because the only thing you're saying here is that you're angry. Please calm down. I am not starting a fight. re-read my posts.
>>1195 >oh no dont call people delusional >calls others loons
>>1198 >I can tell that the "education" did nothing to you It actually did, I only grew out of it when my environment changed to a less shitty one. Only then I could learn empathy and stop being a massive cunt, like I was to some of my peers in elementary school. >amusingly enough, it seems you also hate as well: "catholic loon" is indicative of that He was teaching children to be worse people. Even if he did it out of ignorance and not malevolence, he needs to be scolded. Some people only learn when they receive what they dish out. >I genuinely do not believe that there is a single person on the planet who has never felt hatred It's not about feeling it, it's about seeing this as perfectly fine. People form stereotypes very easily. This is a simplistic heuristic that ends up hurting a lot of people. There are groups dedicated to fighting to present stereotyping as "just noticing patterns", rather than intellectual laziness it actually is. Even when not teaching hate directly, they are teaching that it's OK to just hate someone based on the group they belong to. "It's natural so it's good" Hate is like shitting: everyone shits and hates, but those who aren't shitty will minimize the effect of their "products" on self and others.
>>1200 "Delusion" has a specific meaning. You don't understand what it means, so you shouldn't use it.
>>1201 >It actually did, I only grew out of it when my environment changed to a less shitty one. exactly, experience is what actually shapes your opinions. you were indoctrinated on something. you had a different experience. you changed. I rest my case. hell, the same happened to me. many years ago if you asked me my opinion on some issue I would have parroted some progressive BS because it's all I heard. once I started becoming an actual part of the world and had my own experiences, both good and bad, my views entirely changed because the shit I was told didn't line up with anything I was experiencing. so I've been in a very similar situation to you. >he needs to be scolded what makes you think this is a good idea? what makes you think fighting his aggression against gays with aggression is good? and please don't get offended at this, this is a genuine question, I am seriously not angry even if you think I am >People form stereotypes very easily. This is a simplistic heuristic that ends up hurting a lot of people. it's how people learn. do people learn incorrectly? possibly. but you learn by shoving your dick in a beehive, getting stung, maybe trying again once or twice and getting stung again, before you stop sticking your dick in a beehive. a few bad experiences with literally anything can do the same thing. cause people to have all kinds of "irrational fears" of things that we can actually prove are most likely not going to hurt them. telling that person with a fear to "not fear" is not going to work obviously. no words can undo bad experiences either. if people have different experiences later that can change things, but the idea that "education" will have an effect is nonsensical. >Hate is like shitting: everyone shits and hates, but those who aren't shitty will minimize the effect of their "products" on self and others. what if you believe your hate is beneficial? refer back to snakes. "fuck snakes, stay away from those fuckers or you might die." there are multiple ways to perceive hate, and people have their reasons for believing it is good to spread. whether or not you agree with those reasons is another thing entirely.
>>1199 >taught hate means that someone spewed their hateful opinion and you decided to believe it indiscriminately. this mostly doesn't happen. good experiences and bad experience affect your opinions. Except it does. People adopt opinions from their environment, especially when young. Experiences happen much later and often never. >maybe we should have murder education too if it actually works. Teaching psychopaths anger management makes them less likely to murder/assault. So yes, murder education is done and works. >how are you exactly supposed to go against the word of a literal holy text Holy text is teaching stupid shit. It means people who understand that should avoid giving legitimacy to holy text. It shouldn't be seen as "just a natural thing" to obey the holy text or hate those weird skin color people. >I'm attacking the idea that "education" (actually indoctrination) is the answer to everything. You can call anything indoctrination if you want to stretch the definition enough. There absolutely are millions of people who have picked up irrationally hateful beliefs from their peers, teachers, priests, parents. Many of those "sources" intentionally taught them those beliefs.
>>1204 >Except it does. People adopt opinions from their environment, especially when young. >Experiences happen much later and often never. no, children have experiences like everyone else and you're constantly observing information before it is even told to you. most things aren't even taught to you because your perception already picked up on this when you were just a baby. you learn things like your native language, you begin learning more abstract concepts and things that happened in the past from being taught. and you will hear opinions. hearing the opinion of "I hate something" can have varying levels of influence but at the same time children often test things for themselves. it's why child-proofing dangerous things exists because despite being actually educated on something factual like "x is dangerous, please don't play with it" children still get killed. experiences with most things end up happening and if the experience never happens your opinion on the matter was generally irrelevant anyway. once you experience something you may have an idea of what to expect or you may even have an opinion based on what you've heard but things begin to rapidly change upon having experiences with X, whatever X is. if you are sheltered this doesn't happen. in which case you shouldn't be worried about "education," you should be worried about sheltering and experiences. >Teaching psychopaths anger management makes them less likely to murder/assault. psychopaths don't feel emotions. anger management is for things like "intermittent explosive disorder." the effectiveness of both drugs and therapy for any mental health problem is inconclusive last I recall >Holy text is teaching stupid shit. It means people who understand that should avoid giving legitimacy to holy text. >It shouldn't be seen as "just a natural thing" to obey the holy text or hate those weird skin color people. you've stated your opinion, and I pretty much could have guessed that's your opinion on the matter. but it doesn't really answer the question. it's stupid isn't an answer. stupid people exist. >You can call anything indoctrination if you want to stretch the definition enough. no you can't, provable facts are not indoctrination. there's a large scale problem though with pushing opinions as education. "you should believe my opinions, they are the correct ones" doesn't work first and foremost as soon as the person has experiences that contradict the opinions, and it's also just plainly not education. it's indoctrination. if it were actual, real education then it should be true and I should not have an experience that goes against the education. I was educated how to ride a bike. I found that every single time I ride a bike, that the education was true 100% of the time. the same cannot be said for passing off opinions. that's why there's a different word for it, but people with agendas conflate indoctrination with education because they want to give it more validity.
>>1203 >telling that person with a fear to "not fear" is not going to work obviously. no words can undo bad experiences either. if people have different experiences later that can change things, but the idea that "education" will have an effect is nonsensical. It has a massive effect. Just like first impressions have massive effects on perception of others, being taught about someone will change your first few encounters. And very often, there are no experiences at all. While blacks can't hide their blackness (except on the internet), gays hide all the time, so opinion of them is, vast majority of the time, formed not by experience, but by stereotypes. Especially in countries where being openly gay is a social death sentence. When you're taught that junkies had it coming, you won't want to help them. You'll keep this belief until something challenges it, which may never come. If you were instead taught that they made errors in their life and can't just stop, you'll have a more favorable view of them. >what if you believe your hate is beneficial? Then you should find out what is beneficial about it and apply that, instead of the harmful emotion itself. Instead of hating snakes and wanting them tortured to death, see them as danger and just keep them away. No need to apply caveman logic when you have better logic.
>>1206 >Just like first impressions A first impression is an experience. being told gays are bad is not an experience with a gay person. a bad first impression could sour your relationship with gays. even more could be pretty hard to undo. >Especially in countries where being openly gay is a social death sentence. yes, back to islam. and yes, when you are sheltered from experiences with gays your opinions on gays might literally be that they breathe fire or something. if you're willing to believe in a holy text, it's pretty hard to use "education" against that. no "education" is going to work because they will bite back with "but the word of god says" and you have instantly lost. this is why experience is more important than education and indoctrination. >see them as danger and just keep them away okay, so let's say that I did not want blacks in my community because I am worried about crime. perhaps this even gets passed as some kind of law. do you think this will suddenly not be deemed as hate?
I'll be back in a bit, I have to go, once I'm back we can continue the conversation if you'd like to.
>>1205 >it's why child-proofing dangerous things exists because despite being actually educated on something factual like "x is dangerous, please don't play with it" children still get killed So you're saying that teaching children that playing in traffic is safe will totally not make them more likely to die? >psychopaths don't feel emotions. Psychopaths absolutely do feel emotions, especially frustration, which they feel stronger than non-psychopaths do. They don't feel fear or empathy and some of their emotions are weaker, but many are unaffected. For example, disgust is felt mostly the same. >it doesn't really answer the question. it's stupid isn't an answer. stupid people exist. I can't fix stupidity, but I can oppose it. People who understand that stupidity is stupidity shouldn't just let it happen. >no you can't Yes, you can. You haven't defined your terms, so you can twist them all you want until someone forces you to define them. >provable facts are not indoctrination You can share provable facts in such a way that it ends up being indoctrination. If you only share 13%/50%, which are statistically true, you are teaching anti-black prejudice. A full picture would include things like poverty and its effects on crime rate. >as the person has experiences that contradict the opinions Which can take decades. And even then, the pre-conceived notions will play a large part in those experiences. >"you should believe my opinions, they are the correct ones" Now that's a strawman. No one said you should teach opinions. In fact, the original point implied "don't teach opinions".
>>1207 >do you think this will suddenly not be deemed as hate? It will be deemed hate because you're targeting them for their blackness. A radical feminist could say you should be kicked out because men are more likely to rape, even if you never raped anyone and don't intend to.
>>1207 >yes, back to islam. I mean slavic countries. It's not literal death sentence, just being treated as a weird monster, outside agent, black sheep of the family. Though in low IQ groups, it can be a literal death sentence.
>>1209 >So you're saying that teaching children that playing in traffic is safe will totally not make them more likely to die? No, and fear of death is often enough to get most children to not toy with something. but fear of death is pretty extreme, and it needs to be in order to keep a species alive. fear of death will absolutely keep you from having certain experiences. but other than fears of death I've seen things like hatred of clowns be solved not by telling the person repeatedly "clowns are okay they are fine look at these stats clowns do not kill people." instead they hire a clown and an audience and instruct everyone to pay no mind to the subject, and act like he isn't there. then they bring him into a room with an audience and out comes a clown, he freaks out, and nobody pays him any mind. eventually after a few experiences he's fine. >Psychopaths absolutely do feel emotions, especially frustration, which they feel stronger than non-psychopaths do. well then I might be wrong on that one but that's what I had heard. >I can't fix stupidity, but I can oppose it. People who understand that stupidity is stupidity shouldn't just let it happen. that's fine, even understandable. the problem is a stupid person doesn't learn, that's why they're stupid. what good is education now? >You can share provable facts in such a way that it ends up being indoctrination. the fact itself is not indoctrination. using the fact to back up something that is not necessarily true or not necessarily the answer or other opinions on the matter exist or maybe this thing you're backing up is not always true is indoctrination, especially if you're passing off the opinion portion as fact. but the fact is just a fact. >Which can take decades. It can. Or not. I dropped my left-wing opinions pretty fast. they didn't hold up to scrutiny very long, not even from other people, but from my own observations. and then later I realized none of them held up well in debate either. >Now that's a strawman. No one said you should teach opinions. In fact, the original point implied "don't teach opinions". I never said you said that you believe opinions should be taught as facts. I'm saying other people do. and they teach them as facts and pass it off as education, when in reality it is indoctrination. the more I think about how useless education is, I look back on my schooling. even real, factual education. if I go far enough into the past, I remember none of it. I do remember tons of experiences from that time. if I go a bit into the future, I begin to remember a little more and a little more, but realistically overall I remember little. I remember even less of the constant barraging of left-wing indoctrination other than a few talking points that were basically said at me in a pretty weak attempt to make me believe what is moral and what is not. misogyny this, oppression that, discrimination here and there, and these groups are bad and you should hate them and blah blah blah. but now I think about experiences I had from those times and I remember a hell of a lot more of it. the experiences shaped me. and I'll remember them for an extremely long time, vividly.
>>1210 >It will be deemed hate because you're targeting them for their blackness. well no, you're targeting them due to disproportionate amount of crime. whether you're one of the people who says that blacks are only more crime-prone due to poverty or whether you say they're more crime-prone due to racial differences, it doesn't really matter. the fact is, on paper they are more crime prone. so if you removed them from a community, the effect would very likely be that the crime would go down. you said to use the useful part of the hate. you said the useful part of the hate is not hating the snake, just avoiding and removing the snake. so I gave you the quite literal example of what that would entail: removing black people. I'm not even saying that I agree with removing black people, I'm just making the point here. and as expected, you call removing black people as "hate." so therefore, avoiding the snake is hate too, and therefore I have again deduced that hate served a purpose in survival. in essence I don't know why we're debating this point, because we're actually on the same page. >>1211 >I mean slavic countries. >It's not literal death sentence, just being treated as a weird monster, outside agent, black sheep of the family. well then don't say death sentence, because death sentence means death sentence which means islam.
I don't know if you'll be back since I had to go, but I just want to say that I was never angry or otherwise upset and I do not have any negative feelings towards you for disagreeing with me. in fact I respect you for challenging me, and I haven't debated this deeply about something in a while.
for my debate friend: I think you might actually be very interested in this. you should look up "Daryl Davis." he's a black man who meets with the very few remaining members of the KKK. all he does is talk to them, and give them an experience of what it is like to interact with a black person. he's gotten tons of them to leave the KKK after just giving them positive experiences with a black man, despite all their "education" (indoctrination) about black people. there are some good youtube videos about him as well as a documentary. it's equal parts surreal and equal parts interesting: seeing a black guy casually hang out with the KKK is honestly hilarious but it's extremely interesting from a psychological POV. experience is everything, and once these people experience civil discourse with a black man they completely disavow the things they've known their entire life. worth looking into if you're interested in that.
>>1213 >hatred of clowns be solved not by telling the person repeatedly "clowns are okay they are fine look at these stats clowns do not kill people." But you absolutely can teach an impressionable child to be terrified of clowns. It may make it hate clowns well into adulthood, especially since clowns are pretty rare nowadays. >the problem is a stupid person doesn't learn, that's why they're stupid All mammals can learn in some way. The stupid just need more consistent, forceful, simple messages. They learn from emotions, opinions, peer pressure, not from facts. >the fact itself is not indoctrination You can't share a fact alone. Language is inherently subjective and the highest degree of objectivity possible here is "we all agree that it's true". Even if you could telepathically share facts directly, you could still share them in such a way that a person ends up with worldview more wrong than before, by filling in the gaps you intentionally left vague. >I dropped my left-wing opinions pretty fast. I had to interact with actual right-wingers to truly drop my right-wing opinions. I live in a strongly right-wing country, so for two decades, my experiences were all one-sided, "history rewritten by the victor". I only truly learned how much of it is bullshit when I randomly decided to troll right-wingers, by pretending my beliefs are opposite of what they are. Then I realized that many of my beliefs were stupid, not backed up by anything, at least in case of transgenders (I'm still a bit racist). >>1214 >well no, you're targeting them due to disproportionate amount of crime Radical feminist analogy again: would you say that "woman only" neighborhoods are OK? That being denied a job purely because of your sex (when the job has nothing to do with it) is OK? Men do more crime than women, pretty much everyone will agree. >well then don't say death sentence I said "social death sentence", but OK, it was ambiguous. >>1216 I heard of that, it's just that you can't guarantee experience. Education does affect people heavily and it's the first chance many people get to learn about something. You can't "clone" Davis, but you can tell children that he existed. Kinda relevant: pride parades were supposed to be something like this at first. Hate against gays is built almost entirely on ignorance and "otherness", so even just learning that gays exist and aren't the mythical hedonistic boogieman did a lot. Nowadays it's almost as corporate as christmas, but it still may work the same way.
>>1217 >But you absolutely can teach an impressionable child to be terrified of clowns. It may make it hate clowns well into adulthood, especially since clowns are pretty rare nowadays. ...yeah possibly, if you tell them that clowns are known for killing people and would likely result in death. but I think even an impressionable child is going to have his doubts considering a clown is just an occupation and very easy information about the contrary could also be displayed. as soon as he were to say something like "clowns are all killers" or something (kids repeat things they hear all the time) someone would very likely ask where they learned that. I'm not so sure where fear of death from clowns would lead a child, but then again I don't even know where fear of clowns comes from. >They learn from emotions, opinions, peer pressure, not from facts. yeah I'd even argue that if you're going to try to teach a stupid person you'd have more luck giving them an experience, an emotionally positive experience, with something. if that's even possible for some things. for technical things I don't know how you'd apply an emotional angle but even stupid people feel emotions so it's probably the best way to go in order to get them to absorb information. >You can't share a fact alone. I do. >Language is inherently subjective okay you have technically got me here but that's a technicality that can be used for anything. without language we don't really have any other good way to convey things. sure, the same sentence can be interpreted differently by two people, but there is still value there. there are efforts to try to remove the ambiguity and subjectivity from language. check out lojban if you're interested, but just due to the subjectivity of language I can't say all data is worthless or subjective or anything else >I had to interact with actual right-wingers to truly drop my right-wing opinions. >I live in a strongly right-wing country, so for two decades, my experiences were all one-sided, "history rewritten by the victor". >I only truly learned how much of it is bullshit when I randomly decided to troll right-wingers, by pretending my beliefs are opposite of what they are. Then I realized that many of my beliefs were stupid, not backed up by anything, at least in case of transgenders (I'm still a bit racist). This is getting further removed from the topic of "education" and indoctrination and experience and their values but I do believe that a lot of opinions are reactionary. again I'm not even judging or hating on you here because a lot of mine are reactionary too. I also think that the difference in our location is a pretty big factor. where I live it is very different, it is very left-wing actually and despite the left-wing groups here claiming to be "against hate" I see more hatred from them than anyone else. in fact, they HATE, and I mean HATE right-wingers with a passion like no other. realistically the right-wingers here just pick on them and give them shit and argue with them, but we're quite used to them and it's not really a thing of hate. considering you live in a right-majority area, I can already tell where you live it's very different so this is obviously going to completely change the perspective. but that's a good debate that could be entirely separate.
>would you say that "woman only" neighborhoods are OK? That being denied a job purely because of your sex (when the job has nothing to do with it) is OK? I am actually okay with people hating. I understand why people hate. I think there is a reason why humans evolved to feel hate and fear and other things, and it served us a purpose. I think to an extent it can still serve us a purpose, however sometimes I think hates and fears are irrational. it depends on the situation. I think if women did not want to be around men and wanted their own community, it's fine. if someone didn't want to hire me because I'm a man, whatever because I probably don't want to work there anyway. however, naturally I'd do just fine in a job where men are preferred over women. whether or not it's right is going to be a lengthy discussion though. >Men do more crime than women, pretty much everyone will agree. yes. if someone put a stat in front of my face saying "men are responsible for most violent crime" I wouldn't be offended. I'm a man and I would say they are right. if I were black I would like to think I wouldn't be offended if someone showed me a stat that blacks are more prone to crime. I would also say they are right. >Education does affect people heavily and this is just where you and I disagree. unsurprisingly, based on my experience, experience is more important than education. I will admit that I think I value education a little more than I used to after debating you, and I now am more worried about indoctrination than before, but I still think that experience can make it mostly irrelevant for a lot of people because I've seen it happen too many times and in my own life. I still think experience overpowers education or indoctrination, but maybe it's a little more significant than I initially gave it credit. >pride parades were supposed to be something like this at first I genuinely feel bad that it got co-opted by some absolutely terrible people who are being publicly indecent and even bringing children along while literal sex acts are being performed in public because it gives people an overwhelmingly negative experience of gay people while the majority of gays would never dream of shoving a dildo in their ass on the street while a child watches. that's not fake either, I know that things get co-opted all the time the pride parade stuff is a fucking terrible look in a lot of places.
>>1218 >even an impressionable child is going to have his doubts Dumb people exist. They often believe inane things just because they never bothered to ask questions and just accepted everything that supports their worldview. Even non-dumb people may hold on to a dumb belief, just because they never had a reason to think about whether it's true or not. >there are efforts to try to remove the ambiguity and subjectivity from language Not remove, just limit. Artificial languages like this are simply not practical. It would lose its unambiguous meaning very fast, because people use mental shortcuts all the time, associate words with their usage and so on. Still, the point was, even when you share things that both sides would agree are facts, you can still mislead. Violent crime is falling, but if you present recent shootings, people will think it's time to go tough on crime and give up liberties for safety. >I see more hatred from them than anyone else. in fact, they HATE, and I mean HATE right-wingers with a passion like no other Make sure you're reading their actual opinions, not their version presented to you by those on your side. Most people don't want to understand the other side, just "win", so they'll present the worst side of the other side. >if someone didn't want to hire me because I'm a man, whatever because I probably don't want to work there anyway What if it was just a HR bitch being a bitch, with potential coworkers being cool and you actually really wanted the job? What if you were repeatedly shown that you can't get equal treatment just because you're a man? It adds up and wears you down. >experience is more important than education Education is supposed to give someone experience, though. Desegregated schools are one way this experience is formed. I don't know how well do they do it, but the idea is there. Some schools want to teach the ability to evaluate information, which would be useful as normies rarely learn it by themselves. For example, debates where you don't know whether you'll argue for or against some idea, so you need to prepare both sides. Pro-tradition groups hate the idea, so it's unlikely to gain much traction. >bringing children along while literal sex acts are being performed in public This is greatly overblown by propagandists. While San Francisco has pride parades merge with fetish groups (most of the paraders are straight), this is an exception. In most places, there's no nudity and the worst you'll see is shirtless fat old guys.
I think you may have left. I'll sum up my views on this whole debate as best as I possibly can: I think you can educate a person as to what hate is. I don't think you can "educate" a person to not hate. the morality of all of this is up for debate, and you've changed my perspective a little bit. the last time I got as deep as this in a debate was a long time ago and I thank you for this experience. I am remorseful that my earlier posts came off as angry, I think it was due to me using profanity. I use profanity in informal discussion liberally, however in text I think it translates into anger or hostility. I'll try to be more conscious of that because I think it gives the wrong impression. I genuinely enjoy deep debate. it's extremely rare that I get to do so, and I actually had a really good time talking to you even if it seemed otherwise. last time I debated this deeply, funny enough, was with a christian preacher. it's beginning to amuse me how polar opposite we are. this preacher was standing outside, and he was not saying anything hateful at all. he had been through a lot, addiction and abuse and his life had fallen apart. he was apparently saved by the generosity of the local church. I was walking by and he was not spewing hate, but just preaching to anyone who wanted to listen that belief in god can save you from anything. people in my area hated that and were giving him obscene gestures and even throwing things at him. I felt bad so I stopped to talk to him, partially because I was interested in what he had to say and partially because I felt bad at how mean people were being to him. I think we talked for about 6 hours straight, we talked so long that we ended up walking together to get something to eat because we were both starving. our debate got so deep that to this day I cannot define the word "information." that's how deep it got. and I loved every second. he turned my worldview upside down in multiple ways, none of them political or anything. and he was just one guy. it's a shame more people don't sit down and have these in-depth conversations because I find them to be incredibly provocative. thoroughly enjoyed our exchange. I hope the fact that it's public does something good, but realistically most people will probably not bother to read it unfortunately. but I think they should. thanks for the debate, I genuinely had a nice time
>>1226 oh there you are, I just sent a farewell cause I thought you left and I'm going to go now. I genuinely appreciate the debate. Have a good day, or night
>>1227 >>1228 See you, I'll still be there tomorrow.
>>1227 >I don't think you can "educate" a person to not hate But you can educate someone not to hold untrue beliefs against someone. For example, if someone believes that blackness itself is inherently causing crime and everyone who is black will eventually commit a lot of crime, education can help. Scapegoating is useful politically, so it keeps happening. Nazis united to fight the jew, communist dictators were executing their own by claiming they are bourgeois spies/enemies of the people, Occupy Wall Street was de-fanged by making white man the enemy. Sometimes even just adding context can turn "blacks do more crime because they are worse than whites" to "blacks are poorer and poverty causes crime". >I am remorseful that my earlier posts came off as angry, I think it was due to me using profanity It's more about the "delusion" part. It's a very confrontational word, comparable to "schizo". It expresses that you see the other side as wrong and unwilling to learn. "Delusion" is a strong belief that can't be changed by showing facts, so saying that someone is deluded implies that they don't understand something obvious. >it's a shame more people don't sit down and have these in-depth conversations They're rare because most people don't really want to learn what the other side thinks. I have recently argued a pro-commie position, even though I'm not a communist, just because one of my co-workers said that communism can't work. Then it turned out he meant one strawman of communism, but he asserted that all communism must be like this. It took a long while for him to even consider the possibility of communism that doesn't have a strawman form of equality. People think "how can I be right and others wrong" and not "he said something I see as wrong, how could it be interpreted to make it not wrong?".
>>1186 I don't think things are necessarily going to improve on this plane of existence. I could be wrong, but I think on top of the impracticality of some kind of utopian future I think there are more spiritual reasons for the harshness of this world. >>1190 This. >>1209 >If you only share 13%/50%, which are statistically true, you are teaching anti-black prejudice. A full picture would include things like poverty and its effects on crime rate. I don't know if I have the statistics, but there's a greater correlation between race and crime than there are things are like poverty and crime and lack of education and crime.
>>1241 Still, that poverty thing should be taught as a background, because it explains a lot of the correlation. There is no benefit to teaching children about race/crime correlation. They only need to know how to recognize signs of a potential criminal, which is more about aggressive interpersonal style, being loud, sagging pants and so on. This implicit racial segregation leads to a vicious cycle: >blacks have lower IQ >blacks with high IQ are mistreated based on stereotypes and have problems finding high IQ jobs, communities, culture, have to go back to the rest >crab bucket pulls them back to low IQ zone >blacks don't have any good role models of their own race, black children worship rappers, criminals, pop stars >blacks have lower IQ I'm pretty racist and believe most of IQ (and crime) is genetics, but I still approve of affirmative action, because if done right, it would help to create proper role models for blacks. If they have no hope of ever achieving anything, they won't try. It also makes them more likely to be criminal, because who cares about hurting those who consider you worse? Genetics aren't everything. They are a lot, but there's still non-genetic room for improvement. I went through a lot in my life and changed heavily, so I know how shitty can a person get in wrong environment.
>>1243 >blacks with high IQ are mistreated based on stereotypes and have problems finding high IQ jobs, communities, culture, have to go back to the rest Maybe, but those types of blacks are exceptions to the rule and should realize that.the stereotypes exist for valid reasons. >I'm pretty racist and believe most of IQ (and crime) is genetics, but I still approve of affirmative action, because if done right, it would help to create proper role models for blacks. Blacks achieved a lot more when whites were a lot stricter with them. They even seemed to look up to whites. I don't seem them becoming successful without having to actually work for success. But I don't really have any workable solutions. There have to be good ways of simulating the civilizing selective pressures that Europeans went through, but eugenics isn't politically viable anymore. That's true even if you're talking about soft forms of positive eugenics. Race mixing also isn't a solution, since whites aren't having enough expendable kids to sacrifice to mixing.
There is never going to be a perfect world and trying to make it perfect only leads to it becoming more horrible. Let people do whatever they want to do as long as they don't hurt others, that would be the closest political thing you could do to making things better. Equality before the law. Freedom as possible. You will never get rid of things like poverty, racism, inequality and hatred... but you can make things kinder on your own level. Be kind to the people you love, and you'll make the world a better place in effect.
>>1266 >Let people do whatever they want to do as long as they don't hurt others The thing is, they are hurting others.
>>1267 To a certain extent that's unavoidable, humans hurt each other no matter what they do, but if it doesn't directly hurt anyone, it should still be allowed.
>>1269 >if it doesn't directly hurt anyone, it should still be allowed Pouring a tub of mercury into a river doesn't hurt anyone "directly".
>>1271 It does, hurting the ecology is directly hurting everyone including the thousands of other organisms you are hurting, and I classify it as direct harm.
>>1272 So it hurts them indirectly. That's the whole problem: there's a lot of indirect harm and saying >hate will be there, just ignore it isn't that much different from saying >companies will pour toxins into water, just don't drink water
Can't have the good, without the bad. There have been good eras and bad eras. There will be more good eras and more bad eras. Don't worry too much about it!
>>1273 That's not what I was saying, I'm saying "try to help with your local problems instead of trying to change the world because changing the world simply doesn't work"
if you really want a happier world, start posting Teeline shorthand memes ok
>>1405 That may be what you meant, but you mentioned "directly hurting", which is a different thing. You can do plenty of evil without doing anything direct. Same for good. >changing the world simply doesn't work And yet the world changes constantly, often because enough people want it to change. I'd say it differently: try to fix the world on your own level, not all at once. Small results now over big results maybe-never.
These problems are just the manifestation of human traits and will never be eliminated by enacting some system. Best we can do is accept them and try reduce harm but all this stuff will always be going on desu
>>1438 I think there are plenty of systems that could be enacted to eliminate human traits. Accepting flaws is good, moving to correct them is better!
>>2437 I guess you can try to zap the brain or lobotomize people outright, but that would be throwing out the baby with the bath water. You don't have to accept flaws, you accept the fact that they exist and are fundamental to the human experience and then work around them as best as possible. >eliminate human traits
>>2460 i wasn't done writing wtf anyway you get the point

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms
Delete
Report

Captcha (required for reports)

no cookies?