The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Dystopian [chat]
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
But let's say, hypothetically, that some future society had psychology and sociology so dialed-in, so finely tuned and understood, that it is objectively inarguable that their strategy for social-sexual engineering resulted in the most happiness for the most people. Even if that strategy were something that I were uncomfortable with, I would still have to admit that within the parameters of the hypothetical world that we've fabricated, they know better than I do.
I think this is missing from my discussion of BNW, especially in response to Styrofoam and Ludious
yes I support the society that BNW has erected....with the caveat that I realize that in our world right now that wouldn't work, for a variety of reasons. It is quite obviously fiction, but in context of the story I think that the society that the Controllers have erected in BNW is not bad, and I don't sympathize with the character of the Savage in context of the work.
I'm sure that if we tried to explain water fluoridation to somebody from the 1700s, he'd be creeped right the fuck out.
We take a fertilizer byproduct and dump it in the water supply? Gross!
Or vaccination. You're taking the fluid from the skin sores of cows and injecting it in people? Ew!
If we're entertaining an arbitrarily futuristic understanding of how people work, then we have to at least consider that our feelings of disgust may be borne from ignorance.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
LudiousI just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered Userregular
edited April 2011
I don't see how I am ignorant to the fact that controlling people like marionettes is wrong.
I think that conditioning people for one particular form of sexual behavior - whether its lifelong sexual monogamy or extreme sexual promiscuity - wouldn't actually work. By that, I mean it wouldn't actually make people happy or give them fulfilling lives. Partly because I think it's largely situational; lifelong monogamy is great when you've found somebody you're supremely compatible with, sexual promiscuity is great when you're in a community of people who match you in terms of sexual attractiveness and appetite.
On top of that, I don't think we actually understand that much about how sexuality works. Sure, we get it pretty well on a gross biological level; we're even starting to get it on a neurological level. But understanding how people romantically/sexually relate over a lifetime on emotional, mental levels? We're barely at a level of ancient Greeks talking about the spheres.
So if you were to ask, "If a society conditioned people to be happy doing {X}," I'd say, "How do they know that {X} is better than {Y}?" Furthermore, how do we know that society wouldn't work better with a diversity of sexualities? BNW posited that we need a division of economic labor; maybe we need a division of romantic behaviors for reasons that we don't yet understand.
Right now, I don't believe in simple equivalency between monogamy and nonmonogamy. I don't believe that one is clearly better in all situations; at the same time, I don't believe that either one works in every conceivable situation. So asking "what if everybody was conditioned to be monogamous?" rings a little bit like me like asking "what if everybody was conditioned to be introverted?"
But let's say, hypothetically, that some future society had psychology and sociology so dialed-in, so finely tuned and understood, that it is objectively inarguable that their strategy for social-sexual engineering resulted in the most happiness for the most people. Even if that strategy were something that I were uncomfortable with, I would still have to admit that within the parameters of the hypothetical world that we've fabricated, they know better than I do.
Social conditioning doesn't really work anyway. At least not without an advocate on the level of a religion.
My favorite dystopian novel is Homage to Catalonia.
I'm sure that if we tried to explain water fluoridation to somebody from the 1700s, he'd be creeped right the fuck out.
We take a fertilizer byproduct and dump it in the water supply? Gross!
Or vaccination. You're taking the fluid from the skin sores of cows and injecting it in people? Ew!
If we're entertaining an arbitrarily futuristic understanding of how people work, then we have to at least consider that our feelings of disgust may be borne from ignorance.
We don't properly appreciate the virtues of a society that breeds people to be drones because 300 years ago they might not have appreciated floridated water?
You claim to be so open and to hate your closed society, but then you bang the door on its hinges.
"Normal"
my ass.
I was writing a proper post but the forums ate it and now I've kinda forgotten what it was about.
Uh.. I do remember saying I don't understand what you mean by banging the door on its hinges.
Oh yes! I also explained that I meant normal people as in people who are able to speak to people on more than one topic, usually the topic of their academic field. Also people who aren't so stuck up and impressed by their own titles and alleged societal standing that they end up being a complete cockwad if you don't know anything about what they've learnt about for the past 20, 30, or 40 years.
Those people seriously piss me off. There's more to life than academia.
Daxon on
0
Rear Admiral ChocoI wanna be an owl, Jerry!Owl York CityRegistered Userregular
edited April 2011
Enforcement of ideals is pretty well necessary to society
It kind of sucks when you see the words plainly, but then if you consider for a second that not hurting others is an ideal it seems pretty good to me
It's kind of difficult to take a hard stance on something so broad as whether enforcing ideals is right or wrong unless you're considering individual things as they relate to society
Should people refrain from hurting one another? Of course. There's an ideal just about anyone can agree with and want enforced.
Should people be held in a planned, rigid system? Personally I disagree very strongly with that. If someone has the means they should be able to do whatever they wish and not be tied down by some kind of social standing.
There are all sorts of things to consider, but on the whole enforcement of ideals is something that just has to happen
Strict and rigid societal control is for sure something I chafe at but control in general is necessary
I would like to use isabella in my latest playthrough
also, that glitch acted really weirdly for me
when I first used a respec potion, it worked normally
but when I played again a while later, I had both assassin and shadow specializations (at level 9) and the 25% critical damage thing from Shadow. I think my total critical damage was fine.
I don't see how I am ignorant to the fact that controlling people like marionettes is wrong.
Then you can go find some place in Angola to wander naked, forage for berries, and shit in a ditch.
But if you try to wander naked through the streets, forage in a supermarket, and shit on the sidewalk, you'll discover pretty quickly how our society handles "controlling people."
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
LudiousI just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered Userregular
edited April 2011
There's a difference between coming together as a society and saying that's "good" for society and that's "bad' for society. There is granular control.
Indoctrinating and even crippling someone from birth to function as a drone is awful.
I'm all for a society with rules, but those rules shouldn't be, "sorry you were born to be a janitor."
I'm sure that if we tried to explain water fluoridation to somebody from the 1700s, he'd be creeped right the fuck out.
We take a fertilizer byproduct and dump it in the water supply? Gross!
Or vaccination. You're taking the fluid from the skin sores of cows and injecting it in people? Ew!
If we're entertaining an arbitrarily futuristic understanding of how people work, then we have to at least consider that our feelings of disgust may be borne from ignorance.
That person from the 1700s would only be creeped out for the length of time it takes to finish the sentence though.
We take a fertilizer byproduct and dump it in the water supply greatly reducing one of the primary causes of human suffering and death. (even one of the earliest homonid skeletons ever found - Turkana Boy suffered from and probably died of a tooth abcess)
You're taking the fluid from the skin sores of cows and injecting it in people massively reducing chid mortality and completely eliminating a disease - smallpox - which ravages your society and has brought down entire civilizations.
I would like to use isabella in my latest playthrough
also, that glitch acted really weirdly for me
when I first used a respec potion, it worked normally
but when I played again a while later, I had both assassin and shadow specializations (at level 9) and the 25% critical damage thing from Shadow. I think my total critical damage was fine.
I'm sure that if we tried to explain water fluoridation to somebody from the 1700s, he'd be creeped right the fuck out.
We take a fertilizer byproduct and dump it in the water supply? Gross!
Or vaccination. You're taking the fluid from the skin sores of cows and injecting it in people? Ew!
If we're entertaining an arbitrarily futuristic understanding of how people work, then we have to at least consider that our feelings of disgust may be borne from ignorance.
We don't properly appreciate the virtues of a society that breeds people to be drones because 300 years ago they might not have appreciated floridated water?
I don't think you are providing enough room in the discussion for the possibility that your idea of what makes a good society might be wrong.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
LudiousI just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered Userregular
You're taking the fluid from the skin sores of cows and injecting it in people massively reducing chid mortality and completely eliminating a disease - smallpox - which ravages your society and has brought down entire civilizations.
How is that fundamentally different in structure from 'We inject fetuses with ethyl alcohol so they're happy doing the jobs they were born to do, eliminating the depression and stress that plagued 20th century society.'
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
You're taking the fluid from the skin sores of cows and injecting it in people massively reducing chid mortality and completely eliminating a disease - smallpox - which ravages your society and has brought down entire civilizations.
How is that fundamentally different in structure from 'We inject fetuses with ethyl alcohol so they're happy doing the jobs they were born to do, eliminating the depression and stress that plagued 20th century society.'
" There were still women serving in the militias, though not very many. In the early battles they had fought side by side with the men as a matter of course. It is a thing that seems natural in times of revolution. Ideas were changing already, however."
You're taking the fluid from the skin sores of cows and injecting it in people massively reducing chid mortality and completely eliminating a disease - smallpox - which ravages your society and has brought down entire civilizations.
How is that fundamentally different in structure from 'We inject fetuses with ethyl alcohol so they're happy doing the jobs they were born to do, eliminating the depression and stress that plagued 20th century society.'
In one of those you're eliminating human freedom?
Yeah. Much as I hate to agree with Sammich about anything that is a very important difference between the two.
It's the difference between removing a potential obstacle to happiness and just making people care less about their shitty situation.
Posts
I think this is missing from my discussion of BNW, especially in response to Styrofoam and Ludious
yes I support the society that BNW has erected....with the caveat that I realize that in our world right now that wouldn't work, for a variety of reasons. It is quite obviously fiction, but in context of the story I think that the society that the Controllers have erected in BNW is not bad, and I don't sympathize with the character of the Savage in context of the work.
did you hear about the election last night
The Wisconsin thing? Last I heard was that it was super close but it looked like Prosser was going down.
twitch.tv/tehsloth
it is called Dystopia, Datopia
I haven't read it in a while, but isn't that the one where people forget about you as soon as you die
his others about the Conquistadors, Alexander the Great and Shakespeare were excellent.
yup
Kloppenberg 740,090
Prosser 739,886
now we go to a recount including provisional ballots
We take a fertilizer byproduct and dump it in the water supply? Gross!
Or vaccination. You're taking the fluid from the skin sores of cows and injecting it in people? Ew!
If we're entertaining an arbitrarily futuristic understanding of how people work, then we have to at least consider that our feelings of disgust may be borne from ignorance.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Social conditioning doesn't really work anyway. At least not without an advocate on the level of a religion.
My favorite dystopian novel is Homage to Catalonia.
Think about it.
There really isn't a comparison they're on such a different level.
We don't properly appreciate the virtues of a society that breeds people to be drones because 300 years ago they might not have appreciated floridated water?
I was writing a proper post but the forums ate it and now I've kinda forgotten what it was about.
Uh.. I do remember saying I don't understand what you mean by banging the door on its hinges.
Oh yes! I also explained that I meant normal people as in people who are able to speak to people on more than one topic, usually the topic of their academic field. Also people who aren't so stuck up and impressed by their own titles and alleged societal standing that they end up being a complete cockwad if you don't know anything about what they've learnt about for the past 20, 30, or 40 years.
Those people seriously piss me off. There's more to life than academia.
It kind of sucks when you see the words plainly, but then if you consider for a second that not hurting others is an ideal it seems pretty good to me
It's kind of difficult to take a hard stance on something so broad as whether enforcing ideals is right or wrong unless you're considering individual things as they relate to society
Should people refrain from hurting one another? Of course. There's an ideal just about anyone can agree with and want enforced.
Should people be held in a planned, rigid system? Personally I disagree very strongly with that. If someone has the means they should be able to do whatever they wish and not be tied down by some kind of social standing.
There are all sorts of things to consider, but on the whole enforcement of ideals is something that just has to happen
Strict and rigid societal control is for sure something I chafe at but control in general is necessary
I would like to use isabella in my latest playthrough
also, that glitch acted really weirdly for me
when I first used a respec potion, it worked normally
but when I played again a while later, I had both assassin and shadow specializations (at level 9) and the 25% critical damage thing from Shadow. I think my total critical damage was fine.
Then you can go find some place in Angola to wander naked, forage for berries, and shit in a ditch.
But if you try to wander naked through the streets, forage in a supermarket, and shit on the sidewalk, you'll discover pretty quickly how our society handles "controlling people."
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Indoctrinating and even crippling someone from birth to function as a drone is awful.
I'm all for a society with rules, but those rules shouldn't be, "sorry you were born to be a janitor."
Anyway, FOX news: totally a serious news organization
That person from the 1700s would only be creeped out for the length of time it takes to finish the sentence though.
We take a fertilizer byproduct and dump it in the water supply greatly reducing one of the primary causes of human suffering and death. (even one of the earliest homonid skeletons ever found - Turkana Boy suffered from and probably died of a tooth abcess)
You're taking the fluid from the skin sores of cows and injecting it in people massively reducing chid mortality and completely eliminating a disease - smallpox - which ravages your society and has brought down entire civilizations.
now it just has to go through microsoft
so six months or so
It helps that I don't know any others, but she's being absolutely hilarious on 10 O'Clock Live.
I don't think you are providing enough room in the discussion for the possibility that your idea of what makes a good society might be wrong.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Daaaaaa Topia
How is that fundamentally different in structure from 'We inject fetuses with ethyl alcohol so they're happy doing the jobs they were born to do, eliminating the depression and stress that plagued 20th century society.'
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Then it sounds like Brave New World is about due for a thorough edit job to remove such liberal bias
yeah dat makes a baker's dozen for me.
In one of those you're eliminating human freedom?
Yeah. Much as I hate to agree with Sammich about anything that is a very important difference between the two.
It's the difference between removing a potential obstacle to happiness and just making people care less about their shitty situation.
We eliminate all sorts of human freedoms when we determine that the benefits of eliminating them vastly outweigh the benefits of having them.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.