Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Most violence in the world is motivated by moral sentiments

qz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 338 posts

Re: Most violence in the world is motivated by moral sentiments

#221

Post by jsprogrammer »

mercer wrote: post #176
knieveltech wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment and the one prior add quite a bit to the dialogue. These downvotes are unfortunate.

While I haven't made up my mind on this issue entirely, I am often one of the people downvoting these kinds of comments, or even flagging them if they're more extreme. The reason for this is that I've become increasingly convinced that the health of a community, especially one that relies on a relatively poor medium (text comments), is very dependent on the civility of said community. I'm a bit surprised to find myse…

>In the same way that a parent getting angry can sometimes be more effective than a parent logically dishing out an appropriate punishment

There is no way to know if that statement is ever true.

Re: Most violence in the world is motivated by moral sentiments

#222

Post by throwaway7767 »

belorn wrote: post #219
throwaway7767 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now you're elevating a vocal subset of "feminists" to represent the entire group. There are plenty of old-school feminists, from when feminism was about equal rights. They just don't create as much internet drama as the other kind, so you hear about them less.

Its hard to disregard that subset here in Sweden when there a government that self-identify itself as feminist. Several years ago there was a initiative to create equality in education. Any student that was a minority in their class received a minor bonus as an incentive. The initiative was however deemed a failure when it was realized that the majority of student fulfilling the requirement was men and not women. Aft…

> So excuse me for having a hard time finding those old-school feminists that talks about equal rights. The only time I saw one was in a opinion piece a year ago where equal rights was described as the "old" feminism movement, and I saw a lot of hatred directed at her rather than support in the comments.

That was my point: the people most active in online discussions do not necessarily represent a majority view. They are simply the most vocal. Talk to people around you - family, friends and coworkers. Does a significant proportion of them share these beliefs?

The people most likely to comment on matters like this in online discussions are people with extreme opinions on them.

I cannot comment on the swedish initiative as I'm not familiar with it.

Re: Most violence in the world is motivated by moral sentiments

#223

Post by thorwayyy »

rustynails wrote: post #177
TeMPOraL wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The Toxoplasma Of Rage", an excellent essay[0] by Scott Alexander, points out that sadly there are only two choices for activists today - behave nicely, gather universal agreement to their cause and then get completely ignored, or draw attention to their cause by being so hated by everyone, that half of the audience starts working against the cause just in spite. [0] - http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/17/the-toxopl…

I know what you're saying but it isn't true. Let's look at 2 examples, the LGBT community and Feminism. LGBT celebrates its differences. It welcomes everyone. It is open minded and tolerant. Feminism bullies, ridicules, excludes, creates us/them divides and is continually hypocritical. You could not have 2 more different different approaches. You don't need to be a bully. You don't need to threaten or ridicule or div…

Brendan Eich was forced to resign as CEO of Mozilla by the LGBT movement because he supported this: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

Re: Most violence in the world is motivated by moral sentiments

#224

Post by Lawtonfogle »

rustynails wrote: post #177
TeMPOraL wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The Toxoplasma Of Rage", an excellent essay[0] by Scott Alexander, points out that sadly there are only two choices for activists today - behave nicely, gather universal agreement to their cause and then get completely ignored, or draw attention to their cause by being so hated by everyone, that half of the audience starts working against the cause just in spite. [0] - http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/17/the-toxopl…

I know what you're saying but it isn't true. Let's look at 2 examples, the LGBT community and Feminism. LGBT celebrates its differences. It welcomes everyone. It is open minded and tolerant. Feminism bullies, ridicules, excludes, creates us/them divides and is continually hypocritical. You could not have 2 more different different approaches. You don't need to be a bully. You don't need to threaten or ridicule or div…

>LGBT celebrates its differences. It welcomes everyone. It is open minded and tolerant.

While I find them more tolerant on average, this is not true of the entire group and they do not welcome everyone.

>Domestic violence. It's repeatedly reported as a man thing

Haven't recently studies found that lesbian couples are the most violent and among heterosexual couples the violence is far more equal than public perception?

Re: Most violence in the world is motivated by moral sentiments

#225

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

xupybd wrote: post #142

I liked this article, it went straight to the heart of the issue. Many take a cheap shot at religion (in most cases Muslims) when they talk about this sort of stuff. But this article talks about morality as the factor. While moral codes are often a huge part of religions they are also a huge part of other groups of society, such as animal rights groups, labour unions and even criminal organisations. To me this seems…

> While moral codes are often a huge part of religions they are also a huge part of other groups of society, such as animal rights groups, labour unions and even criminal organisations.

Very true indeed, but I think that religion still deserves particular attention because it's the most prominent institution that promotes believing claims without evidence as a virtue, in particular in the area of morality, which paves the way for others promoting their equally insupportable claims. Religion is the major obstacle that prevents people from understanding that what is moral is a scientific question that has just as much an objectively correct answer as the question whether jumping from a tall building will increase your well-being or not.

Re: Most violence in the world is motivated by moral sentiments

#227

Post by lsniddy »

kaonashi wrote: post #211
rustynails wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know what you're saying but it isn't true. Let's look at 2 examples, the LGBT community and Feminism. LGBT celebrates its differences. It welcomes everyone. It is open minded and tolerant. Feminism bullies, ridicules, excludes, creates us/them divides and is continually hypocritical. You could not have 2 more different different approaches. You don't need to be a bully. You don't need to threaten or ridicule or div…

The topic is about violence. Feminists aren't violent; in fact they're a reaction against gender-based violence. > Yet, I strongly oppose feminism. I believe in equality, but not equality for one gender or skin colour or sexual orientation. That means you're a feminist. I'm sorry you're not able to get your definitions straight. > Bullying is not required. Calling people out on their bullshit isn't bullying.

> Yet, I strongly oppose feminism. I believe in equality, but not equality for one gender or skin color or sexual orientation. That means you're a feminist. I'm sorry you're not able to get your definitions straight.

I disagree with that definition. I think that view means the parent poster is an educated, rational person. Are you sorry for me as well?

Re: Most violence in the world is motivated by moral sentiments

#228

Post by Lawtonfogle »

kaonashi wrote: post #211
rustynails wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know what you're saying but it isn't true. Let's look at 2 examples, the LGBT community and Feminism. LGBT celebrates its differences. It welcomes everyone. It is open minded and tolerant. Feminism bullies, ridicules, excludes, creates us/them divides and is continually hypocritical. You could not have 2 more different different approaches. You don't need to be a bully. You don't need to threaten or ridicule or div…

The topic is about violence. Feminists aren't violent; in fact they're a reaction against gender-based violence. > Yet, I strongly oppose feminism. I believe in equality, but not equality for one gender or skin colour or sexual orientation. That means you're a feminist. I'm sorry you're not able to get your definitions straight. > Bullying is not required. Calling people out on their bullshit isn't bullying.

>That means you're a feminist. I'm sorry you're not able to get your definitions straight.

Old school maybe. Old school feminism is incompatible with the new stuff.

Re: Most violence in the world is motivated by moral sentiments

#229

Post by humanrebar »

ordinary wrote: post #171
humanrebar wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have opinions, of course, but I aspire to have them grounded in scripture. However, you asked, so I'll try to share my take on violence and sin. Keep in mind that I'm not an expert theologian. I'm willing to be wrong on these points if someone can show me how I'm missing some detail or theme in the teaching of the Bible. Also, since the importance of sin is in the intention behind the thoughts and actions and not i…

First of all, thank you for your contributions to this thread. They've been very interesting. I noticed a couple of points in this post that I would like some clarification on, if you have the time and inclination. Christians are supposed to submit to their government, even oppressive ones. There are quite a few references for this (b) (c). Finding more examples isn't difficult if you want more. Where does this senti…

I'll answer your questions in reverse order, if you don't mind, because the second one is more important.

> Is it really impossible to be 'good' if you don't follow God, according to scripture? Is an atheist sinful by definition?

It is completely possible to be good and not a Christian. It is completely possible to be a Christian that is a worse person than an atheist. There is actually a lot of confusion around this point, even among Christians. A lot of the problem centers around what "Christian" means. It could mean:

1) Someone who feels like they're a Christian. Even Richard Dawkins considers himself a "secular Christian" (a). He doesn't believe he's going to heaven or doing God's will on Earth.

2) Someone who Christ will admit into heaven when they die.

3) Someone who strives to follow Christ's teachings on this Earth.

For the purposes of this conversation, it sounds like you're asking about #2 (feel free to clarify if I'm making the wrong assumption here).

As far as that goes, gjm11 gets some elements right but seems to miss the mark for some reason. The Bible is very clear on this point. Salvation is given to people by God, through Christ. Period (b). We are supposed to have faith that He will be fair about granting eternal life. If you don't believe God is fair or that the Bible is true, then I suppose what the Bible teaches on this point is not interesting.

So what does God want from us? To trust Him, believe in Him, and have faith that He will take care of everything (c). It's hard to see how an atheist can have this perspective. It seems impossible to me.

How does this relate to being a "good person"? Well, eternal life is supposed to be the default state of things, but when we reject God and His teachings, we accept responsibility for our own eternity (d), and I certainly can't make myself live forever. When we are "bad people", it should be extremely obvious that we are rejecting God (e).

So while some of us may be good, or even great, people, all of us have rejected God on some level and blown our chances to enjoy entrance into heaven on our own merits (f). Christians who think they're "better people" than atheists need to re-examine the Bible and work on that part of themselves (g1) (g2).

On to the next question:

> ...but it seems strange to me that early Christians would be required to submit to a government that is persecuting those that attempt to obey God, for attempting to obey God.

It is strange from many perspectives. The Bible actually says that (h).

Anyway, Daniel (i) is a great book to read for an example of how to both obey God and submit to oppressive rulers. At times, Daniel and his friends would ask politely for exceptions from rules that would cause them to disobey God's commands (j). When that was not possible, Daniel and his friends would respectfully refuse and accept the consequences, even if that meant death (k) (l). That seems pretty harsh, but if you have faith that the all-powerful God is good and that He's watching you, all sorts of things are possible, even a peaceful death under persecution (m).

In certain ways, the physical world is the Matrix to someone with strong faith in God. When you have guaranteed salvation and are following the commands of an all-powerful God, you don't have to dodge bullets. You don't have to.

I realize that sounds silly to many, but it's what the Bible teaches.

(a) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/hay-festival/10853648/Ric...

(b) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john+14:6

(c) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John+3%3A16&ver...

(d) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+6%3A23&v...

(e) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2010:27

(f) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+10%3A17-27...

(g1) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Timothy+1%3A1...

(g2) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians+2%3A8...

(h) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs+14%3A1...

(i) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel%201

(j) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel+1%3A8-21...

(k) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel%203&vers...

(l) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel%206&vers...

(m) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+7%3A54-60&...

Re: Most violence in the world is motivated by moral sentiments

#230

Post by Lawtonfogle »

maldusiecle wrote: post #215
option_greek wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand that crimes have been committed against the LGBT community (including prosecution of Turing). But crimes based on women's right ? Do we base them on the same scale ? (genuinely curious)

This kind of argument kind of baffles me. Surely you're aware that women have suffered violence as a result of their lack of rights, aren't you? For large parts of history, domestic violence against women has been ignored or joked about, or in some places explicitly made legal. Until relatively recently, spousal rape wasn't even considered a crime. I guess there's this notion that, pre-feminism, women had fewer right…

>For large parts of history, domestic violence against women has been ignored or joked about

And the same doesn't happen concerning DV towards males?

>or in some places explicitly made legal

Duluth model anyone?

Post reply on HN