Quote:
Originally Posted by FatherSioux
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
It's really the strongest case for not censoring anything. In my eyes the only censoring that should take place is doxing, or actual threats of physical violence.
Censoring based on morals is a slippery slope lubricated by terrible ideas.
My biggest advice for you is you get out of those worlds, read books not websites. Get out in nature.
Reading list: The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt
|
My only critique of
The Righteous Mind was that Haidt entirely omitted Prudence in his morality matrice.
As you may know, prudence is the tempering measure by which righteousness and overzealousness is determined.
I believe the oversight is due to the fact that the concept of prudence generally eludes the left entirely. This is precisely why they feel justified in shaming, deplatforming, and censoring anyone that doesn't wholeheartedly fall in alignment with their liberal agenda lock, stock and barrel.
It's also why they believe any moral conclusions that they have come to consensus on MUST be translated into law (so that it becomes illegal to disagree with their conclusions). They're simply incapable of a more live and let live philosophy intrinsic to western thought/culture.
Ultimately, leftist dogma has graduated to the category of "religion", at this point. Let's take the concept of egalitarianism and nondifference into consideration? What scientific proof is there for non-differentiation and equality in the natural world? Absolutely none, whatsoever. Yet their entire worldview and body politik is contingent upon the fallacy that we are all the same.
04-17-2019, 04:55 PM
Linear Mode
