Why I hate philosophologers, and will love my job:

[wolven7]

Johnny Cash - [Cry, Cry, Cry]--- There is no question that people of different socio-economic backgrounds will have varying moral and ethical predilictions. (Venetian Snares - [Öngyilkos Vasárnap]). Anyone who thinks there is hasn't been paying attention. For the sake of generalisation, there will always be a cultural divide, and expecially when you Further that divide, and look along lines of westernisation, in terms of culture. The more western and affluent, the more morally permissive. The more Legally conservative, and the more likely to make a clear distinction between those sets. Not saying it's right, just saying that's the way it is. The amount of research, in various fields that support both the premises and the conclussions is so staggering as to be damn-near obvious. This question, therefore, is uninteresting. It has nothing left to teach us. The question riding on its belly, like a remora, however, still is.

Veruca Salt - [Celebrate You]--- What is the mechanism by which our cultures divide themselves along these lines? There is still some agreement, even across the world, in the poor areas of "non-western" societies, so what drives this? Why do we allow certain points of enculturation to become "morally wrong," as a universal? I'm talking about things like flag-burning, wearing red to a funeral, not letting someone have sex with the chicken only she or he is going to eat. Where is the harm? Is it psychological? Why? Because we have been told that it is disrespectful, to mar these symbols, to break these taboos. There is only harm because we have been told that there is harm.

Nina Gordon - [Straight Outta Compton (N.W.A. Cover)]--- There we have the greatest kind of paradox: You find the symbol of your freedom more valuable than the actual display of freedom (of expression: burning it) which it represents. In that same vein, red at a funeral is supposed to mean disrespect to the dead, or a refusal to be saddened at the death of this person. (Gorillaz - [M1 A1]). Wearing a red bikini, jeans, or whatever, is seen as disrespectful, when, in fact, it could be the most respectful thing that that person has ever done, for the departed. They could have had a deal, it could have meant more than anyone else would know.

My point is that moral judgement is a martix of harm, offence, enculturation, and perception. (Attrition - [Still Life?]). We should treat and weigh it as such. To quote myself: '[[the matrix idea is] our over-arching moral framework, with each section of said being weighed, to varying degrees, on a case-by-case basis. In this way, we retain the ability to generalise, while being able to understand individual instances, more contextually. Our understanding of what constitutes harm is, thusly, more refined, and more easily applied.' (2005).

In other news, mech_angel bought me an old Tom Waits album, "Foreign Affairs," and the new KMFDM album, at Tower today. "Hau Ruck." Literally German for "Strike Jerk;" loosely meaning "Heave-Ho." I bought "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Glaxy," and "The Long Kiss Goddnight," from FYE. I never saw the first, and I loved the latter. I always thought it was pretty damned awesome, even if no one else did. (KMFDM - [Ready to Blow]). Geena Davis, in that movie, had a lot to do with how i saw Molly, in my head, when I read Neuromancer.

Spent a good portion of the afternoon riding MARTA, with mech_angel, getting to know her route to work, and her talking to her new manager. After that we stopped off in Lenox, and saw Danielle. I ran into Ary, my old boss. Slightly awkward, but not really. I hope she's getting out of there.

Tom Waits - [Burma-Shave]--- Anywho, other than that, all we did today was talk about Euripides, and the nature of tragedy. Greek religion is so fun.

I'm out.

Comments

[unknownbinaries.livejournal.com]

Mm. Morals are a tricky thing. Any given thing can potentially offend anyone, or be claimed to cause harm to anyone. It all comes down to really judging how people define this harm, and how much of a pussy they're planning on being....

Might be a little less abrasive or judgemental with that last if I weren't tired.

And it was only fair, as you fed me for over a week.

[wolven.livejournal.com]

Exactly, which is why we need to be able to take them as they come, and not try to slot them into a simple Yes/No binary system. Discernment and judgement should be used, to understand the situation, and determine if an offense was meant, given, or felt. All three have real meaning, and they do not always converge.

And what was i going to do, let you starve?

mildly curious

[not-hothead-yet.livejournal.com]

tell me where incest lies on this equation?

oh and

[not-hothead-yet.livejournal.com]

child molestation?

Re: mildly curious

[wolven.livejournal.com]

It depends: Is the incest forced, coerced, via intimidation or a position of superiority?

The more we move toward two consentual adults, taking precautions, and responsibility for their actions, the less morally wrong the act seems to be. If one or both parties feel as if they are harming or being harmed By the other, then it moves toward moral wrongness. When it is one person in a position of power, over another, using that to coerce, it moves further toward wrongness.

Re: oh and

[wolven.livejournal.com]

Child molestation is more clearly wrong. The child is not in a position to make a decision for her- or himself, and is ostensibily reliant on the realm of adults to guide and not take advantage of them. Such coercion does, in fact, do harm, and violates levels of trust, changes developmental paths, and can retard socialisation.

Some say that there is the ability for informed consent to be given, but i don't think that there are many children, in the world, whocan truly display an understanding of the level of responsibility (mental, emotional, physical), attendant within Sexual Activity.

It is also difficult to find cross-cultural studies of the effect sexual abuse, or early sexual activity, meaning that it is difficult to prove that, in a sufficiently so-built society, children might not understand these factors, earlier, and make more informed decisions. This, in turn, would lead them to be less scarred by early sexual activity.

However, without that research, what research we have points to the breakdown of mental processes, and the psychological, emotional, and physical alterations made, time and again, in cases of sexual abuse. Therefore, it is more clearly wrong, and most so, because of the coercive aspect, and the taking advantage of thise who were taught to trust. It hurts not only the individual, but future society, as a whole.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_molestation