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

The world's most toxic value system (2001)

uwgb.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 209 posts

Re: The world's most toxic value system (2001)

#31

Post by leohutson »

aaron-lebo wrote: post #27
leohutson wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's illogical to make value judgements about cultures, there is no objective way to do it. What makes one culture "better" than another? Survival? Virality? Honor? Piousness? Lawfulness? Every culture values these things differently. Calling it politically correct shows your own failing to comprehend something outside of your own cultural frame of reference. Notably I could make the same point about morality as the…

It's not "illogical" to say that a culture which executes homosexuals is inferior (in that aspect) to ones that don't. You can argue about the standard, but it's straightforward and logical.

I disagree, it's inferior from your cultural perspective, but some cultures clearly didn't/don't value human life the same way you do.

For instance from my perspective a culture that doesn't allow gay marriage is clearly inferior, which is straight forward and logical.

Re: The world's most toxic value system (2001)

#32

Post by jacobolus »

Declanomous wrote: post #7

This is interesting. At the risk of being lambasted for this view, I've often felt that this is the issue with a lot of places within the United States. For instance, I've always considered personal interactions in the South to be largely dictated by honor. I do not think it is coincidental that the poorest and least-educated areas of the country are the same area. I think a similar problem is at play in inner-city v…

My impression is that a lot of honor based societies perpetuate themselves at lower levels because they get battered hard by the overarching society / more powerful external powers. People feel that they need to protect themselves and their tribes from being stomped from above. Combatting power inequality and systemic violence/abuse is probably the biggest counter to turf fights, domestic violence, etc., at least on a generational time scale.

Re: The world's most toxic value system (2001)

#33

Post by orbitur »

This takes a strange detour towards the end.

> Even more disturbing is a rise in a mean-spirited resistance to any kind of honors for Confederate soldiers.

Seems a bit contradictory to insist that we honor immoral people for the sake of... I'm actually not sure how the author got here. Especially after the bit about not accepting responsibility.

The Confederacy was a moral failing, and the best way to take responsibility for it is to disown it.

Re: The world's most toxic value system (2001)

#34

Post by linkregister »

bobthechef wrote: post #16
ChuckMcM wrote: post #10

There are a lot of works on the relative impact of honor or shame cultures. I was first exposed to that concept by some of the works of Roland Muller ( http://www.rmuller.com/ ). The thesis that is favored by Christian theology is that Jesus taught forgiveness as the word of God rather than retribution (eye for an eye) which has been the prevailing response, and in so doing changed cultures that had been stagnant for…

The important thing to notice is that he author isn't talking about retribution being wrong per se, but private vendettas. Justice is by its very nature retributive. You cannot show mercy if retribution is not the deserved and proper response to a crime. One difference the author alludes to between justice meted out by the state and private vengeance is that the latter is characteristic of blood feuds.

Yet the most effective justice systems focus on public safety and rehabilitation. See Norway, et. al.

Though I agree whole heartedly with your conclusion, that blood feuds never have a settled score, while an individual’s debt is (theoretically) paid when the State has meted out its punishment.

Re: The world's most toxic value system (2001)

#35

Post by Nomentatus »

It's just not historically true that "northern European culture has been relatively free of the thar mentality." We weren't magically spared these traits. In fact few hundred years ago duels were the mainstay of the official justice system in England. These duels were, literally, trials. I wish I knew more about how we got away from all that.

Re: The world's most toxic value system (2001)

#36

Post by iamthirsty »

leohutson wrote: post #31
aaron-lebo wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not "illogical" to say that a culture which executes homosexuals is inferior (in that aspect) to ones that don't. You can argue about the standard, but it's straightforward and logical.

I disagree, it's inferior from your cultural perspective, but some cultures clearly didn't/don't value human life the same way you do. For instance from my perspective a culture that doesn't allow gay marriage is clearly inferior, which is straight forward and logical.

To play devil's advocate on this subject: I spent a lot of time growing up in the South, and when I talk to a lot of friend's back home about the current climate here (e.g.: transgender bathrooms being added at work) they are disgusted and claim "our" culture is literally enabling mental illness.

But the coastal culture I live in now and am originally from doesn't view it that way. I get a lot of these culture-clashes daily and it's a really hard thing to figure out. Mainly because life is truly how you view things, and your worldview builds your reality — but how can one say one worldview is better than another, objectively? Because the observers worldview makes them biased, it's really hard to say.

Re: The world's most toxic value system (2001)

#37

Post by ajmurmann »

bobthechef wrote: post #13
georgewsinger wrote: post #3

> Created 19 November 2001, Last Update 30 August 2011 Looks like this was created right after 9/11. It's understandable why he wrote this. > It's considered bad form in many circles to criticize another culture's values. In addition, the social science literature contains a number of rationalizations for the "honor" mentality. One is that every value system makes sense to the people that hold it. Another is that eve…

Officially, perhaps, but our coastal bubbles clearly believe that current liberal democratic values and attitudes are superior.

And yet we are hesitant to push out values on people from other cultures. It's a very different dilemma that I think Houellebecq portrayed fabulously in "Submission". Liberals are eager to defend other cultures whose values could hardly new more opposite. It's fascinating really and a tough position. It's admirable and pathetic at the same time and I'm not sure there is a good answer.

Re: The world's most toxic value system (2001)

#38

Post by ramy_d »

eric-hu wrote: post #11
georgewsinger wrote: post #3

> Created 19 November 2001, Last Update 30 August 2011 Looks like this was created right after 9/11. It's understandable why he wrote this. > It's considered bad form in many circles to criticize another culture's values. In addition, the social science literature contains a number of rationalizations for the "honor" mentality. One is that every value system makes sense to the people that hold it. Another is that eve…

> Rape and genocide and embezzlement also exist for a reason, and make sense to people who think a certain way. > Something this author believes that most people (in our coastal bubbles) don't: that some cultures are better than others. I think you can ask people in coastal bubbles about the rape and genocide cultures of various wars and embezzlement subcultures of various corporations. My money is on them saying tho…

Actually i would argue the opposite. Not to the extent of genocide but the lid has really blown on Hollywood's sexual harassment problem (read: rape culture). Let's not forget Uber's contribution there and of course the whole gamer gate scandal which is still fresh in the minds of the people involved in the community. Racism, classism, and authoritarianism's roaring 2017 comeback. Then there's Madoff, Exon (classic) , various kickstarter scams, Nortel (Canada represent! ) etc

I mean if you think about it just a bit, there are many examples that would indicate we actually live in those cultures. Sure they might say those cultures are inferior, but let's take a cold hard look here.

Re: The world's most toxic value system (2001)

#39

Post by sullyj3 »

leohutson wrote: post #26
georgewsinger wrote: post #3

> Created 19 November 2001, Last Update 30 August 2011 Looks like this was created right after 9/11. It's understandable why he wrote this. > It's considered bad form in many circles to criticize another culture's values. In addition, the social science literature contains a number of rationalizations for the "honor" mentality. One is that every value system makes sense to the people that hold it. Another is that eve…

It's illogical to make value judgements about cultures, there is no objective way to do it. What makes one culture "better" than another? Survival? Virality? Honor? Piousness? Lawfulness? Every culture values these things differently. Calling it politically correct shows your own failing to comprehend something outside of your own cultural frame of reference. Notably I could make the same point about morality as the…

What you're gesturing at is that it's illogical to make value judgements, period, without a standard that your object of interest is being judged against. This fact, which is blatantly obvious once pointed out, is obscured by the shortcomings of our language.

Usually the standard is implicit, but obvious from context, for instance if we were talking about racing, we could say that a Mclaren is better than a Volkwagen, and elide that we mean "better at moving quickly around a racetrack".

It certainly makes sense to judge cultures, as long as you remember to have a standard in mind. For instance, by the standard of the general wellbeing of African Americans, it's manifestly obvious that modern American culture is superior to American culture of the 1850s.

The fact that different cultures value different things shouldn't be a problem for discourse, as long as your interlocutors have values in common. Lack of objective truth about values shouldn't prevent one from working towards the values that they personally hold.

Relativism isn't (or at least shouldn't be) "there's no objective truth about values, so therefore every value system should be treated as equally valid". That would be an objective normative claim, and making it would be inconsistent with relativism. Relativism is just "there's no objective truth about values", and it stops there. Nothing about that prevents you from preferring your own values to those of others.

Re: The world's most toxic value system (2001)

#40

Post by aaron-lebo »

leohutson wrote: post #31
aaron-lebo wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not "illogical" to say that a culture which executes homosexuals is inferior (in that aspect) to ones that don't. You can argue about the standard, but it's straightforward and logical.

I disagree, it's inferior from your cultural perspective, but some cultures clearly didn't/don't value human life the same way you do. For instance from my perspective a culture that doesn't allow gay marriage is clearly inferior, which is straight forward and logical.

It's not possible to be hard science objective in a discussion of values, but in that acknowledgment, there is a possible objectivity in finding viewpoints which allow for subjectivity. If you can't with hard objectivity say that it is correct to execute homosexuals or limit the rights of women, the most objective thing you can do is to protect people of different attributes and viewpoints. The culture which arbitrarily limits those people is operating...arbitrarily.
Post reply on HN