Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213
Results 121 to 123 of 123

Thread: People with No Social Conscience

  1. #121
    Senior Member Thoth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    AHJ 2006
    Quote Originally Posted by pensive_pilgrim View Post
    @Thoth, you started off with a pretty hostile and insulting tone directed at "some people" who "typically" hold views that some people in this thread have expressed. And then when asked to clarify what inspired that your response was "why do you care?". Don't start shit and then try to act like a victim when it gets thrown back at you.
    Telling someone their high morality arguments are full of crap isn't playing a victim card. I am not a "victim" of my experiences, they're just life as I have lived it, and it would have not had meaning without context.

    Quote Originally Posted by jigglypuff View Post
    the irony is you responded to what you saw as "virtue signalling" by doing exactly that, "virtue signalling"

    everybody just wants a chance to show they're better than everyone, no use listening to anyone blah blah etc. /s
    I will admit, practically speaking, you are correct. Touché.

    Quote Originally Posted by oxyjen View Post
    And if it wasn't about me, you could have said so and spared me the bother of typing all of it.
    It wasn't about you, truly, but my goal was realized none the less.

    Here is who it was really about and why:

    Quote Originally Posted by Sinny View Post

    I would second everything Oxyjen said... And say to Thoth, "it doesn't take much to be morally superior than those who condone social eugenics"

    So reactionary, so right wing! Lol

    So if you do a good deed, and think others should do a good deed, you shouldn't talk about it (with the aim to encourage others) because that's just "virtue signalling". Lol.

    Barrel of laughs today, eh Thoth.
    At what point have I argued social eugenics?

    THIS is the problem I was eluding to; conflating contrary opinions with hyperbolic, vitriolic falsehoods on platforms of moral superiority.

    @Sinny even attempted to put words in my mouth by providing a unattributed and entirely fabricated quote.

  2. #122
    Senior Member Sinny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Birmingham, UK
    Then address me directly in future, you spineless swine.

    And if you could pay attention, for once in your life, you'll notice that I didn't accuse you of advocating social eugenics, I was merely pointing out that it doesn't take much to be "morally superior" than those who do.

    Which is something you previously raised.

    So reactionary, so right wing!

    Just go to bed, Thoth.

    Let me guess, your rebuttal will be "well, you should make yourself clearer"

    Tis not my fault, you're a reactionary idiot.

    I'd throw what you said to Oxyjen right back at you "Not every conversation revolves around you!"

    One day your thoughts might be relevant, today is not that day.

    See your below comment about people "claiming the moral high ground"

    Quote Originally Posted by Thoth View Post
    I was challenged and I answered as to why I think casting dispersions at people people who don't share the same notions of self conscious as those claiming some sort of moral high ground is hypocritical, especially when delivered via transparent off handed insults like calling someone a "bitchy coward."

    I do not believe you capable of an actual conversation on the topic based on your lead in with "bitchy/cowardly."
    I don't believe you are able to grasp the basics of any conversation, lolol.

    Also, I did not attribute any quote to you - my owns words to you were quoted, which I thought I made clear when I said "I would say to Thoth [quote] [unquote]".

    Quoting Thoth:

    THIS is the problem I was eluding to; conflating contrary opinions with hyperbolic, vitriolic falsehoods on platforms of moral superiority.

    As for my experience, I spent 3 years administering the "Welfare Safety Net", and worked with clients face to face. It's also a line of work I may be returning to in future and have a keen interest in. So suck my balls, innit.
    Last edited by Sinny; 08-01-2019 at 06:31 PM.
    All truth passes through three stages:

    First, it is ridiculed.
    Second, it is violently opposed.
    Third, it is accepted as self-evident.

  3. #123
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Quote Originally Posted by TeresaJ View Post
    It's weird to me.

    My man is like this. The fact that I care about the general welfare of society and feel obligated to do whatever I can about it, within what I feel is my personal scope, is weird to him. It's not much. I give a portion of my income to charities I think are making a difference. I work in a low-income area. Part of the reason I specifically enjoy my work is because I feel like I'm making a small difference to people who particularly need it. But he acts like I'm trying to be a saint. Dude, if I were trying to be a saint, I'd be doing way more. I'd live in a Catholic worker house. i'd chain myself to fences. This is nothing.
    You just took scored a first debate Harris bounce with me.
    I am surprised to hear this about you! Congratulations on being a decent human

    As for your bf, I would personally be pissed if someone tried to patholigize considerate and kind inclinations in another.

    I don't know the situation well enough to understand why he says that, though.

    ...I wonder if it's some sort of instinctive, fear-thing. Like, I'm not that comfortable around people. I'm actually afraid of angry, bitter poor people. I had enough encounters in my childhood to associate angry, bitter people who were less well off with me with risk, danger, and hostility. So I wonder if my social conscience is actually my effort to alleviate that fear. If I can alleviate poverty and social strife, there will be less for me to fear.
    Motivations are complex. If you feel sympathy and concern, then you are probably a good person, even if the above is true.

    I wonder if it has to do with the whole deal where conservatives are very generous with people they personally know - social betterment is achieved through personal interactions, and less personal interactions/charities are suspicious because they undermine that - vs the more "liberal mindset" of loving thy neighbor as long as thy neighbor is a starving poor person you've never met and not the asshole down the street. Because the asshole down the street is an actual threat.
    Conservatives are -- [obligatory comment coming] for the most part, deficient in empathy and full of rage. They seem to see people as projects; bring a person up to standard, and he or she is deserving of empathy. If an individual doesn't meet certain standards, he or she doesn't deserve compassion, sometimes even to live. Conservatives have a worthiness test

    Liberals are usually more sincere, but they go overboard, and sometimes end up trying to help the dregs of humanity while they overlook less extreme cases of need because these cases are not as sensational.
    Last edited by Lurker; 08-21-2019 at 10:18 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts