Culture and Respect

[BrokenQuill92]

Now I get it!

[kılıç_mehmet]

Conquerors, as the conquerors they are, do have the right to claim moral superiority and do reserve the right to enact laws as they see fit.

Oh, gee, now I understand Africa AND the Nazis! They were right all along!

/s

Well, might makes right, friend. It always did, and it still does so. History proves it.

Of course, he was a bit of a dick, too.

Well, if you have bothered with conquering a people, you obviously would enact a few laws to show that you did so.
The Manchus, for example, forced the chinese to wear their hair in the queue style, and adopt their clothing as a sign of their domination.

Kilics definition of rights appears to be in the form of "might makes right"

Well, in terms of war, that is the only form of "right" there is, unless you get a third party involved, who has to be mightier than both sides in order to decide what is right.
So in a way, yes, might makes right, my friend. Its the law of nature.

[thesummerqueen]

Well, might makes right, friend. It always did, and it still does so. History proves it.

History proves nothing more than that people believed it. But just because you are mightier than someone doesn't make your heinous actions "right" or "good."

[eyemixer]

Don't fuck with prions.

This, a million times over. When I was working in the regenerative medicine field one of the issues we had to deal with was prions. As far as I am aware (it's been a few years since I got out of biotech) while there are some hardcore methods used to remove prion contamination from instrumentation, there is no known way to fully prevent prions from being present and active in tissues. Even treatments that attempt to neutralize prions in tissue cannot be validated as effective without implantation and observation, and even then you only get a % level of confidence for that sterilization batch. AFAIK that % is not even close to what the FDA requires to consider a 'product' non infectious.

[kılıç_mehmet]

It was a side-note to the conversation. He mentioned cannibalism being stopped because of public health (prions), which is an example of intervention in a cultural practice. We began discussing prions from there.

Well, not all cannibals eat brains. But those who do usually do so in order to consume some form of a spiritual energy. It is closely intervined with aborginal beliefs, such as the Maori.
After the British invaded New Zealand, the practice stopped.
A similar belief was human sacrifice in Central and South America, where the mighty tribes captured people from the weaker tribes for sacrifice, but when the Spanish came, and conquered all, and forced their religion upon them, it ceased to be.
So, might makes right, as it seems. But were they right in forbidding them their age-old custom of human sacrifice? One ought to consult a third party there, and for the Spanish, that third party was God. Their religion was opposed to human sacrifice, and they forced their religion on the natives to stop it, who embraced it mainly because they realized that not sacrficing humans did not make the world go under, i.e. their God was beaten by the God of the invaders, so they converted.

---

Well, might makes right, friend. It always did, and it still does so. History proves it.

History proves nothing more than that people believed it. But just because you are mightier than someone doesn't make your heinous actions "right" or "good."

Well, since this thread is all about relativism, tell me why I should calibrate my right-o meter according to your specifications.

[thesummerqueen]

No one said it was all about brains, that's jut how the discussion turned.

And no, might does not make right. Might only means you have the ability to impose your right or wrong view on someone else.

[My imaginary friend is GOD]

Or they could just be Hannibal Lector:

[kılıç_mehmet]

No one said it was all about brains, that's jut how the discussion turned.

And no, might does not make right. Might only means you have the ability to impose your right or wrong view on someone else.

Meaning, that I do reserve the right to impose that view. It is my right, and its right to do so.
Who is to tell me that its wrong? Who has that authority? If you wish to make a point, do it by your might.
Actions speak louder than words, friend.

[eyemixer]

Meaning, that I do reserve the right to impose that view. It is my right, and its right to do so.
Who is to tell me that its wrong? Who has that authority? If you wish to make a point, do it by your might.
Actions speak louder than words, friend.

So are you saying 'ability to do' is the same thing as 'right'?

[thesummerqueen]

We have laws to protect the rights of the few against the howling, shit-throwing "might" of the many. But I don't expect you to understand or acknowledge that, based on prior conversations.

---

So are you saying 'ability to do' is the same thing as 'right'?

9.5 times out of ten, so far, that's exactly what he means.