On Saturday, December 15, 2012 2:07:55 PM UTC-5, rclough wrote:
>
>  Hi Craig Weinberg 
>  
> Ghandi didn't increase anybody's taxes,
> which makes everything he did right.
>

Sounds like a position Jesus would approve of. 

<http://futureprimate.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/61440_452139411520705_1795875294_n3.jpeg>

http://futureprimate.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/61440_452139411520705_1795875294_n3.jpeg

 

>  
>  
> [Roger Clough], [rcl...@verizon.net] <javascript:>
> 12/15/2012 
> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
>  
>
> ----- Receiving the following content ----- 
> *From:* Craig Weinberg <javascript:> 
> *Receiver:* everything-list <javascript:> 
> *Time:* 2012-12-15, 13:19:10
> *Subject:* Re: Progressives and social darwinism
>
>  
>
> On Saturday, December 15, 2012 10:00:54 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote: 
>>
>>  Hi Craig Weinberg 
>>  
>> By progressives I obviously meant those that act to change things. 
>> Which means overthrowing the way the "good, the beautiful and
>> the true" are thought to be and commonly accepted as. 
>>
>
> Do you think that when Gandhi inspired the colonized Indian subjects of 
> the British Empire that he was overthrowing something beautiful? That he 
> was changing what was commonly accepted as good?
>
> When progressives went into the American South to fight lynchings and 
> segregation, was that some kind of a perverse new take on what was 
> 'commonly accepted as good'? How about slavery? Was that good and true and 
> beautiful? How about unrestrained abuse of laborers by industry? Also the 
> good old days?
>
>  
>
>>  Thus one
>> subverts morality, philosophy and religion, and aesthetics. 
>> It's a form of social darwinism. The dynamics of social change.
>>
>
> Just because there is an existing condition does not make it worthy of 
> support. You are justifying whatever form of tyranny and oppression 
> happened to have come before you and denouncing any attempt to restore 
> liberty. That is just as much Social Darwinism as anything else. It is to 
> say 'whoever tries to change anything is a ruthless bastard, but whoever 
> enforces the existing order or regressing to a previous order is a good and 
> moral person.'
>  
>
>>   
>> As with Darwinism, some of these changes have been good. 
>> Einstein, Ghandi, Martin Luther King Jr. and Van Gogh certainly 
>> brought in good new things.
>>  
>> But some are not so good. Nietzsche attempted 
>> to overthrow morality completely, and the poets, novellists, 
>> screenwriters and other artists, etc, have had mixed results,
>> especially to sexual morality and human decency. Now
>> young men think nothing of executing a kindergarten class. 
>>
>
> Of course, not all attempts at change are good or end up being good. The 
> same goes for attempts to prevent change. There are counter-revolutionaries 
> who are just as bloody as revolutionaries.  The idea that 'young men think 
> nothing of executing a kindergarten class' being related to progressive 
> causes is ridiculous. If that were the case, then progressive Scandinavia, 
> France, Canada, etc would be awash in massacres. Progressives try to 
> eliminate guns, remember?
>
>   
>> Twelve-tone music is listenable for a while, but it really has no
>> unity or beauty.  And popular music has discarded beautiful
>> melodies and lyrics in favor of whining voices or those singing rap.
>>
>
> Again, if you are over 65, I sympathize. I'm 44, so I remember being a kid 
> and what it was like in the 70s when modern art, rock music, and other 
> confrontational aesthetics were still big news. I agree with you that 
> culture has become more and more degraded during my lifetime and I agree 
> that there is something to that beyond just my taste, but really it isn't 
> that important. The decay of Amercian culture is not the result of what 
> happened 50 years ago or even (much worse in my opinion) what happened in 
> the 80s when Reagan era conservatism brought back militarism and 
> overconsumption values. If you want to blame something, blame 
> overpopulation and the corruption of American institutions. The value of 
> human life is indirectly proportionate to how many extra people you have 
> and how imbalanced the society is. Those are the tensions which make money 
> more important than making civilization beautiful.
>
>   
>> Now living together without marriage has become the norm for
>> young people, and we have indiscriminate sex and pornography.
>> These destroy the basic unit of human existence, the family.
>> Homosexual marriage also invalidates the meaning of marriage.
>>
>
> Living together without marriage, casual sex, and pornography have made 
> life enjoyable and bearable for everyone, not just young people. They don't 
> destroy anything. The meaning of marriage is up to the consenting adults 
> who participate into it - not *you* or your tastes.
>
> If the kind of rigid, backward looking morality that you elevate really 
> was better, and really was God's magic recipe for perpetual happiness...why 
> didn't it stay that way? Do you think that Satan himself could have 
> convinced truly happy married couples to get divorced? That pornography 
> would have been a temptation for people who were well served by this Bronze 
> Age ideal? Progress triumphed over fundamentalism in the 60s because people 
> were educated enough and content enough for the first time to cast off the 
> Calvinist neuroses of the 19th century and grow up and out into a real 
> world full of real choices - not paint by numbers automatism.
>
> Craig
>
>   
>>  
>> [Roger Clough], [rcl...@verizon.net]
>> 12/15/2012 
>> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
>>  
>>
>> ----- Receiving the following content ----- 
>> *From:* Craig Weinberg 
>> *Receiver:* everything-list 
>> *Time:* 2012-12-13, 11:33:37
>> *Subject:* Re: Re: Moral evaluations of harm are instant and 
>> emotional,brainstudy shows
>>
>>  
>>
>> On Thursday, December 13, 2012 10:43:59 AM UTC-5, rclough wrote: 
>>>
>>>  Hi Alberto G. Corona 
>>>  
>>> It's much simpler than that, I think.
>>> Progressives hate everything resembles anything 
>>> held to be good, beautiful, or true.
>>>
>>
>> Then your thoughts are simple-minded indeed.
>>
>> Gandhi, MLK, Einstein were haters of goodness, beauty, and truth? 
>> Progressives aren't artists or musicians?
>>
>> You can believe in black and white demagoguery if you like..that's 
>> exactly what Progressives want to leave behind.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>>   
>>>  
>>> [Roger Clough], [rcl...@verizon.net]
>>> 12/13/2012 
>>> "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -Woody Allen
>>>  
>>>
>>> ----- Receiving the following content ----- 
>>> *From:* Alberto G. Corona 
>>> *Receiver:* everything-list 
>>> *Time:* 2012-12-13, 10:13:03
>>> *Subject:* Re: Moral evaluations of harm are instant and 
>>> emotional,brain study shows
>>>
>>>   You said it:
>>> ."...in part because it (evolution) carried a sense of "progress" not 
>>> found in Darwin's idea"
>>>
>>> Evolution is descriptive, is the fact. natural selection is the theory 
>>> that explain it. A scientific theory impose constraints with what may and 
>>> may not happen. For example, child caring and risk taking at the same time 
>>> may not happen. 
>>>
>>> That why progressives prefer the term evolution rather than atural 
>>> selection. They want no constraints for his will of the transformation of 
>>> themselves and their society according with its will.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2012/12/13 Craig Weinberg <whats...@gmail.com>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, December 13, 2012 8:48:45 AM UTC-5, Alberto G.Corona 
>>>> wrote: 
>>>>>
>>>>> so awareness and intention are before biology, so you seem to admit a 
>>>>> teleology before life, like me.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Teleology and teleonomy both predate life. They are what time is made 
>>>> of.
>>>>
>>>>  I don`t find this ncompatible ith natural selection (or evolution, as 
>>>>> left-leaning people likes to call it)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hahaha, I wasn't aware that the very term evolution was now 
>>>> politicized. Actually it looks like Darwin preferred another term:
>>>>
>>>> Charles Darwin used the word only once, in the closing paragraph of 
>>>>> "The Origin of Species" (1859), and preferred descent with 
>>>>> modification, in part because evolution already had been used in the 
>>>>> 18c. homunculus theory of embryological development (first proposed under 
>>>>> this name by Bonnet, 1762), in part because it carried a sense of 
>>>>> "progress" not found in Darwin's idea. But Victorian belief in progress 
>>>>> prevailed (along with brevity), and Herbert Spencer and other biologists 
>>>>> popularized evolution.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=evolution
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So the reason that evolution was not Darwin's choice is precisely 
>>>> because he understood that it is not teleological.
>>>>
>>>>  . You seem to admit natural selection up to a point but you reject it 
>>>>> when we are talking to sensible human things like the sexual roles. 
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, natural selection only shapes things that already exist, it 
>>>> doesn't bring awareness or qualities of awareness into existence.
>>>>  
>>>>> You enjoy the fact that NS made female yenas to behave in ome 
>>>>> politically correct ways (it seems). but you reject that NS selection 
>>>>> make 
>>>>> female humans behave s is in almost all the rest of the animal kingdom. 
>>>>> That funny.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think it's funny that you think I'm citing some evidence supporting a 
>>>> left wing agenda. I'm only showing you that gender is not written in 
>>>> stone. 
>>>> It's something that most people are already aware of - although if you are 
>>>> over 60 then you have an excuse.
>>>>
>>>> Craig
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>> .
>>>>>
>>>>> 2012/12/13 Craig Weinberg <whats...@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>> doing
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Alberto.
>>>>>
>>>>  -- 
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>> Groups "Everything List" group.
>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/sdpVQn09vMYJ. 
>>>>
>>>> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>>>> everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
>>>> For more options, visit this group at 
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Alberto.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>> Groups "Everything List" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>>> everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at 
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>>>
>>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/KrxIG-s2MLgJ.
>> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>> everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit this group at 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>>
>> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/2pv1RPrPl58J.
> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com<javascript:>
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> everything-li...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/everything-list/-/u7RFpnuOTqoJ.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Reply via email to