bohm

Joined

• started 191 topics
• posted 7,847 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by bohm

• 
  401

  So, the Womens March ... What Is It For?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  it seems like mobilizing after the election, which seems pointless.

  i keep hearing demands for equal rights but don't understand what rights they are missing exactly.. normally a march is to show the support (and potential votes) for a cause, but ... votes for what?

  ... and the election happened already.. is anyone else confused?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  I just heard a new word today -- alternative facts -- Is that worth protesting even though things are no doubt worse in north korea?
• 
  401

  So, the Womens March ... What Is It For?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  it seems like mobilizing after the election, which seems pointless.

  i keep hearing demands for equal rights but don't understand what rights they are missing exactly.. normally a march is to show the support (and potential votes) for a cause, but ... votes for what?

  ... and the election happened already.. is anyone else confused?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  OK, so we can cross another thing off the "what was this about?" list then eh?

  Yes, "like to touch vaginas" is not on the list...

  Because I value free-speech and I don't want them to turn us into North Korea.

  So if you observe something happening locally that you don't like, then it is okay to protest that even though the same type of things are happening elsewhere in the world only much worse?
• 
  401

  So, the Womens March ... What Is It For?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  it seems like mobilizing after the election, which seems pointless.

  i keep hearing demands for equal rights but don't understand what rights they are missing exactly.. normally a march is to show the support (and potential votes) for a cause, but ... votes for what?

  ... and the election happened already.. is anyone else confused?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  Simon: First of the issue is not if DT likes to touch vaginas. 90% of all men do. That's not what he said and not why people are concerned.

  Second off, yes, I will grant you this: it might on some view be hypocritical of me to be concerned about e.g. trafic laws in my own country when there is child labor in India. Or to be concerned about climate change when people live in cities with toxic air. Or care how long time my kids have to wait to see a doctor when children are dying of starvation in Congo.

  But that argument cuts both ways:

  Why do you worry that some SJWs try to limit free speech when people don't have the basic freedoms in north korea?

  If Women shouldn't protest their own president because of what goes on in Theran that rule got to apply to us all.
• 
  401

  So, the Womens March ... What Is It For?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  it seems like mobilizing after the election, which seems pointless.

  i keep hearing demands for equal rights but don't understand what rights they are missing exactly.. normally a march is to show the support (and potential votes) for a cause, but ... votes for what?

  ... and the election happened already.. is anyone else confused?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  I can't square the circle that people feel so strongly about something such as the language he used about women that they are willing to take a day out, pay to travel all that way, wear a silly hat, listen to polticrap by washed up old hags like madonna and wail that Clinton was not elected ... with the fact that Clinton and her husband also have a terrible record when it comes to treating women.

  I can't see how people find what Trump said so, so crushingly terrible, yet can turn a blind eye to the absolute terrible crimes being committed against women even in the west by certain ideologies and then use the march to promote symbolisms of those oppressive misogynistic regimes.

  Suppose your school has a teacher, and that teacher is really horrible to the kids (let's say he bully the kids) but the school protects the teacher for some reason
  

  So you and all the parents write a letter of concern to the school about what that teacher is doing and why you think he is not suited to be a teacher.

  The school writes you back using your exact argument: Kids in Moghadishu don't even go to schools. Kids in Gambia are beaten by teachers. Kids in this or that place are not protected against sexual molestation: "yet [you] can turn a blind eye to the absolute terrible crimes being committed against women children".

  Would that response really convince you?

  Why do we have to bring Bill Clinton into the picture? Why is Islam even relevant? Sure, you can find a protester here or there who are hypocritical, but you can't use that as an argument to dismiss the concerns of the many protesters who simply wanted to protest a person being put into power who bragged about groping women or is a climate-change denialist. You allow yourself to be concerned about that, why is it wrong for a woman to go onto the streets and protest it?
• 
  29

  Sam Harris & Jordan Peterson

  by azor in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  listening to 2 of my current favorite thinkers debate/discussion.

  i've been looking forward to this since i found out about it a month ago.

  hope some of you get a chance to listen.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  Simon:

  That's a good writeup but just to clarify something about Peterson. AFAIK he does not argue that a man can't be a women or vice versa. He argues that the overwhelming majority are one or the other and that the few who are not or think they are the wrong one from birth still want to be one or the other.

  I know this was not quite what I said but that was also what I meant. It is very tiresome to get all the corner cases in this debate.

  The law is vague but suggests that we have to call people what they want, using made-up pronouns like "Ze", which can change by the hour and if someone gets it wrong, they can be charged with a hate crime based on the person claiming their feelings were hurt.

  I know that is what he said in his first video, however, I have been able to find no evidence at all this is in fact so.

  Did you watch the debate he had with the lawyer? She had professional experience with these type of legal matters and she 100% contradicted him that this was the correct interpretation of the law --- claims that he did not dispute. According to her he is absolutely wrong on the made-up pronoun bit.
• 
  401

  So, the Womens March ... What Is It For?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  it seems like mobilizing after the election, which seems pointless.

  i keep hearing demands for equal rights but don't understand what rights they are missing exactly.. normally a march is to show the support (and potential votes) for a cause, but ... votes for what?

  ... and the election happened already.. is anyone else confused?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  The more I think about this Women's March, the more it makes me angry.
  Really, women in most western countries enjoy THE most protections, rights and freedoms than women have ever enjoyed in the history of mankind. They can be educated, have jobs, pursue careers in pretty much any field they want, they can be involved in politics at the highest level. They are as equal as you can imagine.

  Suppose you have Jill. She works in a bank, she has four kids and a man and has never watched a second of youtube feminism.

  Jill thinks Trump is not suited to be president because of obvious flaws in his character and because of his stance on climate change, something Jill cares for deeply.

  Does it really make you angry that Jill goes to Chicago to protest? Is it legitimate for her to protest?

  Why can't women have the same concerns about Trump as many men have and decide to go have a protest?
• 
  29

  Sam Harris & Jordan Peterson

  by azor in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  listening to 2 of my current favorite thinkers debate/discussion.

  i've been looking forward to this since i found out about it a month ago.

  hope some of you get a chance to listen.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  Well that was interesting..

  For those who don't have 2 hours, Peterson defines (I am going to use the word loosely because Peterson does not talk coherently) truth as what is advantageous for our survival. So for instance our knowledge about smallpox might be true now, but if we synthesize smallpox and destroy humanity, that knowledge was not true (or it was only partially true, or a limited truth, or some other undefined term). This view of truth is one Peterson believes he finds in Nietzsche, and he thinks it is connected to an evolutionary understanding of life. No coherent argument was given for the later.

  Sam Harris is very kind to Peterson and keeps prodding him with examples and illustrations of the problems of that view.. it is as if Sam Harris is thinking that Peterson can't really believe what he is saying and it is only a matter of defining certain words the same way and Peterson will accept that, say, the truth of the propositions "101 is prime" or "E=mc^2" does not depend on what happens 100 years from now. That never happens...

  Whenever Peterson got bogged down with the obvious problems about this view, he launches into a random tangent, often just changing the illustration Sam Harris presented to suit his needs. If Sam Harris finally makes him confront an obvious problem with this view Peterson exclaims: "That's just a microexample!". All the while that happens Peterson seems insistent on cramming as many long words into his sentences as possible which just makes it impossible to parse if those words are supposed to do something technical or are just there to look pretty; my money is on pretty.

  Obviously on this definition of truth there is room for God since Peterson just have to say that scientific materialism is not good for our survival and presto, there is a God. Fortunately, they didn't get to that gerbil of an argument.

  What I think was most shocking was how poorly Petersons idea of truth was thought out. What does advantageous to our survival really mean? What is the definition of a microexample (vs. a macroexample)? Are the various words he uses (partial truth, truth, full truth, fully true, accurate, in agreement with reality, etc.) well-defined or just word-salad? (the interview suggests the later).

  What I thought was interesting is that Petersons claim to fame is to misread a recent law in Canada and now believes it "forces him to use made up pronouns" such as "zir" about students (that is not true but Peterson seems completely unable to understand that). This has launched him onto a youtube crusade, bankrolled by thousands of Patreon dollars, where he sternly lectures us for hours about the evils of quite mundane demands put upon him by his employer.

  What he fights against here is relativism, marxism and postmodernism a whole lot of other things which he believe will destroy society and all that is somehow connected to that law.

  It is interesting that Peterson himself believes a variant of postmodern claptrap (what is true today is not true tomorrow if it turned out to be bad for you) and is on a crusade against another variant of postmodern claptrap (that a man can be a woman the idea pleases him). Is there some kind of projection going on here?

  What I wished Sam Harris had asked him about is if the noun-stuff could be true (as in, it could be true a man was really a woman) if that idea helped him survive for some contingent reason. According to Petersons definition of truth that would very much seem to be the case and so his entire argument about pronouns revolves around what is really best for the students and not about biology. That is, if the male students who believed they were females got laid more the would actually be right.

  I should start a patreon account!
• 
  401

  So, the Womens March ... What Is It For?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  it seems like mobilizing after the election, which seems pointless.

  i keep hearing demands for equal rights but don't understand what rights they are missing exactly.. normally a march is to show the support (and potential votes) for a cause, but ... votes for what?

  ... and the election happened already.. is anyone else confused?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  Razziel: Hahahaha *snort* hahahhahah. That is so funny!

  I am happy you found a way to equate a policy question with a man bragging about grabbing women in the crotch!

  Makes you see how hysterical all the fuss about a bit of good-humored sexual harassment at the workplace is in the first place!
• 
  58

  Women's March on Washington

  by azor in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  my support is with the marchers in washington and around the country today.

  i was raised through my formative years by my mother and sister while my father was out of the picture.

  they gave me the compassion i have today.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  smiddy: I would assume most of the protesters voted Hillary?

  It is hard for the left to win: The right elects Donald Trump and somehow the left gets blamed...

  If we get to blame anyone, why not blame the people who voted Trump for Trump being in power?
• 
  58

  Women's March on Washington

  by azor in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  my support is with the marchers in washington and around the country today.

  i was raised through my formative years by my mother and sister while my father was out of the picture.

  they gave me the compassion i have today.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  bohm

  LisaRose: I meant the WH press conference. You really must see it, it is one of the most surreal things I have seen in my life:

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPlagGOFGeY