Social Approval or Principles?

[Koolay]

I was thinking about how during the peak of slavery in America, it was completely disapproved by society to be against slavery and racism. You would have virtually no friends, people would attack you verbally or physically if you questioned slavery and racism.

Today, being an anti-racist, doesn't require much courage at all. You get big kudos in the western world from society if you speak out against racism.

But... I wonder how many of these anti-racists awashed in modern culture would still stand for their principles, even when the chips are down, and you are completely outnumbered and ostracised for your principles?

How many of you would still be anti-racist if you were completely outnumbered by racists?

Every single society in history has pretty much said the same thing "We are normal, healthy and rational people - but we have a few outliers". If you would take anyone from the middle ages, and put them in modern society, they would be carted off to an insane asylum almost instantly.

How do we know, what we are doing right now in society is valid and ethical, when in a few hundred years, our Joe Shmo might be considered completely irrational and weird.

I guess the question is... Do you care more about social approval or principles?

[Foxaèr]

How many of you would still be anti-racist if you were completely outnumbered by racists?

I like to think that I would be against racism even if I was completely surrounded by racists, just as I am an outspoken atheist who is basically completely surrounded by theists.

If you would take anyone from the middle ages, and put them in modern society, they would be carted off to an insane asylum almost instantly.

I believe you are underestimating the human mind. I am quite certain primitive man dropped into modern society would learn to adapt.

How do we know, what we are doing right now in society is valid and ethical?

As long as a human being is not being subjugated at the expense of another human, then what is being done is clearly ethically proper.

[Koolay]

How many of you would still be anti-racist if you were completely outnumbered by racists?

I like to think that I would be against racism even if I was completely surrounded by racists, just as I am an outspoken atheist who is basically completely surrounded by theists.

If you would take anyone from the middle ages, and put them in modern society, they would be carted off to an insane asylum almost instantly.

I believe you are underestimating the human mind. I am quite certain primitive man dropped into modern society would learn to adapt.

How do we know, what we are doing right now in society is valid and ethical?

As long as a human being is not being subjugated at the expense of another human, then what is being done is clearly ethically proper.

What's your definition of subjugation?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

History - ancient as well as modern - is replete with examples of people who stood for principles over societal approval. Personally, I have, at various times, lost my windows, my liberty and my left eye over matters of principle.

Yes, lots of people will belt up about injustice of all sorts in order to 'fit in' witgh their supposed peers, but it seems plain that if there weren't enough people who did the opposite, then nothing would ever change. Ever.

Boru

[Something completely different]

I stood up for principles and still do.
I do not befriend people with disgusting view or tolerate them in my presence aswell as I speak out against their bigotry.
I even severed contact with close family members because of their views.

[genkaus]

I was thinking about how during the peak of slavery in America, it was completely disapproved by society to be against slavery and racism. You would have virtually no friends, people would attack you verbally or physically if you questioned slavery and racism.

Please don't make such historically inaccurate statements. Your wanton ignorance is embarrassing for us all. Atleast do some cursory research on the topic before posting on it.

Today, being an anti-racist, doesn't require much courage at all. You get big kudos in the western world from society if you speak out against racism.

But... I wonder how many of these anti-racists awashed in modern culture would still stand for their principles, even when the chips are down, and you are completely outnumbered and ostracised for your principles?

How many of you would still be anti-racist if you were completely outnumbered by racists?

So, basically, your question is "Everyone in the society is anti-racist because everyone else is anti-racist, but if everyone in the society was racist then would anyone be anti-racist"?

Ignoring the ridiculous manner in which you put the question, the answer would be - yes, I would and so would many others.

The relation between principles and social disapproval is not simple. Most of the time, people will stand for their principles in face of social disapproval. However, most of the time, your principles would be something that meet social approval.

Every single society in history has pretty much said the same thing "We are normal, healthy and rational people - but we have a few outliers". If you would take anyone from the middle ages, and put them in modern society, they would be carted off to an insane asylum almost instantly.

I've never heard of a single society that says that. And no - someone from middle ages would not be carted off to a mental asylum.

How do we know, what we are doing right now in society is valid and ethical, when in a few hundred years, our Joe Shmo might be considered completely irrational and weird.

By evaluating it on the basis of ethics.

I guess the question is... Do you care more about social approval or principles?

That's a different question. The latter.

[bennyboy]

I don't like agreeing with Koolay, but in this case I have personal experience. When I was in grade one, I got into a fight with a kid because my friends made a circle around us, and kept shouting he was a "fucking Pakky." I didn't have any personal animosity toward the kid (I thought he smelled a little funny, but so do most kids in grade one), and I didn't know what a "Pakky" was, but I really felt that if that many people hated him that much, there must be something seriously wrong with him.

I also agree that when social climes change, most people will be right on board, and may not even know it. How many people in America completely hate Muslims? Maybe 90% I'm guessing. How many people know that it is thanks to Muslim scholars that we use the decimal system, or that much of the Greek culture lost in the Dark Ages was preserved? How many people know that going back as far as the Crusades, when Saladin defeated Richard III, he gave Christians free access to Jerusalem anyway? How many people know that the establishment of Israel in the 20th century was basically a rape of the Muslim population already living there? Maybe 10%.

And yet despite Muslims having killed thousands of people in recent history, and Christians many many millions, we feel perfectly comfortable both in fearing Muslims and condemning them for fearing us.

[Bad Writer]

I was thinking about how during the peak of slavery in America, it was completely disapproved by society to be against slavery and racism.

Are you sure about that? I can guarantee you that the slaves themselves sure didn't disapprove of anyone being against their enslavement.

You would have virtually no friends, people would attack you verbally or physically if you questioned slavery and racism.

-Dad...I was thinking. Why do we have slaves? Aren't they people too?
*SMACK*
-Quit yer' yappin', sonny, and go bring me a glass o' whiskey!

Ah, yes, I'm sure it went down something like that every time.

But... I wonder how many of these anti-racists awashed in modern culture would still stand for their principles, even when the chips are down, and you are completely outnumbered and ostracised for your principles?

Do you think so little of us here at these forums to think that we would just toss out our good sense and rationale? If we were to act like this, then we wouldn't be atheists at all, considering we are outnumbered by theists.

How many of you would still be anti-racist if you were completely outnumbered by racists?

All of us, same as how we're all still atheists despite being completely outnumbered by theists. The reverse can be employed too; how are you still a dumbshit when you're surrounded all the time by extremely intelligent individuals on this website? You see, majority does not always change the way a person thinks.

Every single society in history has pretty much said the same thing "We are normal, healthy and rational people - but we have a few outliers". If you would take anyone from the middle ages, and put them in modern society, they would be carted off to an insane asylum almost instantly.

Every single society? Nope.

Someone from the middle ages would adapt to living among us. Someone from the stone age would do the same. Someone from the future would be another good example. We can do this all day, Koolaid.

How do we know, what we are doing right now in society is valid and ethical, when in a few hundred years, our Joe Shmo might be considered completely irrational and weird.

This is actually a good question. You see...we don't know, but we can definitely expect some things to remain as constants. I would hope that we might even be better at that time. Perhaps by then, someone being irrational and weird will have been proven to be a false idea.

I guess the question is... Do you care more about social approval or principles?

Another good question, but is it the question? This definitely depends on the individual. For me, I care more about principles and what they can do for society when adhered to.

[Koolay]

I was thinking about how during the peak of slavery in America, it was completely disapproved by society to be against slavery and racism.

Are you sure about that? I can guarantee you that the slaves themselves sure didn't disapprove of anyone being against their enslavement.

You would have virtually no friends, people would attack you verbally or physically if you questioned slavery and racism.

-Dad...I was thinking. Why do we have slaves? Aren't they people too?
*SMACK*
-Quit yer' yappin', sonny, and go bring me a glass o' whiskey!

Ah, yes, I'm sure it went down something like that every time.

But... I wonder how many of these anti-racists awashed in modern culture would still stand for their principles, even when the chips are down, and you are completely outnumbered and ostracised for your principles?

Do you think so little of us here at these forums to think that we would just toss out our good sense and rationale? If we were to act like this, then we wouldn't be atheists at all, considering we are outnumbered by theists.

How many of you would still be anti-racist if you were completely outnumbered by racists?

All of us, same as how we're all still atheists despite being completely outnumbered by theists. The reverse can be employed too; how are you still a dumbshit when you're surrounded all the time by extremely intelligent individuals on this website? You see, majority does not always change the way a person thinks.

Every single society in history has pretty much said the same thing "We are normal, healthy and rational people - but we have a few outliers". If you would take anyone from the middle ages, and put them in modern society, they would be carted off to an insane asylum almost instantly.

Every single society? Nope.

Someone from the middle ages would adapt to living among us. Someone from the stone age would do the same. Someone from the future would be another good example. We can do this all day, Koolaid.

How do we know, what we are doing right now in society is valid and ethical, when in a few hundred years, our Joe Shmo might be considered completely irrational and weird.

This is actually a good question. You see...we don't know, but we can definitely expect some things to remain as constants. I would hope that we might even be better at that time. Perhaps by then, someone being irrational and weird will have been proven to be a false idea.

I guess the question is... Do you care more about social approval or principles?

Another good question, but is it the question? This definitely depends on the individual. For me, I care more about principles and what they can do for society when adhered to.

I can give you a better example, of people that believe in the non aggression principle vs. statists, who believe the government initiating force is right. We are vastly outnumbered, and whenever I bring up the logical arguments for the non aggression principle, I just get attacked, insulted, and ostracised for questioning the ethics of a centrally coercive entity. So I don't think many people on this forum care about the principle of atheism, which is rationality, if they can't apply that rationality to other areas. It shows they don't get something fundamental, and/or don't want to.

Statetheists is a better word.

[genkaus]

I can give you a better example, of people that believe in the non aggression principle vs. statists, who believe the government initiating force is right. We are vastly outnumbered, and whenever I bring up the logical arguments for the non aggression principle, I just get attacked, insulted, and ostracised for questioning the ethics of a centrally coercive entity. So I don't think many people on this forum care about the principle of atheism, which is rationality, if they can't apply that rationality to other areas. It shows they don't get something fundamental, and/or don't want to.

Statetheists is a better word.

The reason you get "attacked, insulted and ostracized" is because your arguments are not logical or rational. The flaws of your argument and their utter ridiculousness has been pointed out over and over again. The false premises (e.g. government initiates force), flawed reasoning and abysmally poor understanding of the concepts involved have been shown repeatedly - but instead of trying to correct them, you dogmatically stick to your byline and keep on repeating the same crap over and over and over again. You are the one who has traded in logic and reasoning for nonsensical anarchist dogma and your failure to understand this fundamental fact about yourself has made you the laughing stock of the forum.