GirlChat #604685

Start A New Topic!  Submit SRF  Thread Index  Date Index  

Re: Weird ass place

Posted by Dissident on Wednesday, October 29 2014 at 05:58:59AM
In reply to Re: Weird ass place posted by EthanEdwards on Tuesday, October 28 2014 at 9:45:09PM


1. Group level. I say pedophiles as a class are influenced by self-interest, but I don't ascribe it to any given individual such as you. I don't know.


The thing is, self-interest does not necessarily denote an interest that is inherently sinister, or against the interest of another group or society in general. There is a difference between self-interest and blatant selfishness. The former is not incompatible with the greater good; the latter, however, suggests the benefit of yourself or your group at the expense of the welfare of other groups and/or society in general. It's natural for any group to want the right to live a life where they can achieve the greatest degree of happiness and fulfillment, and this in no way necessarily suggests selfishness. Further, I sincerely believe that the self-interest of every group is tied together with the intrinsic right of all groups to have the freedom to do so. This is why I take umbrage to the accusation that pro-choicers only care about themselves, because I do not believe the available evidence suggests that our right to fulfillment, and the right of choice for youths, would be destructive to anyone.

Further, you need to realize that your contention that the majority of the class (as you call it) to be out for self-interest is clearly making a strong implication that all who hold a certain view are working for selfish interests that do not take society as a whole, and youths in particular, into consideration at all. If you truly believe this, then by all means, say it. I would never ask you to lie. But however you look at it, such an accusation is an insult, and I don't think we're out of line by taking it as such. We're fully capable of reasonably evaluating available information, and fully capable of acting in accordance with a conscience and ability to empathize with others; and we sincerely believe younger people are competent enough to make choices currently disallowed to them with the proper education and support.

2. Conscious level. Unconscious factors can influence beliefs that are sincerely held.

Shouldn't the anti-choicers consider being afflicted by the same problem, considering how strongly such beliefs are held by society at large? I don't think the available data supports this belief, nor that a belief necessarily has merits simply because it's widespread.

For an avalanche of evidence on the basic point, see Kahneman's "Thinking: Fast and Slow" (in my view, a profound book). While from "group level" considerations I think it entirely possible that you would hold the views you do even if you were not attracted to children, I actively think it is unlikely that you and Dante are saying false things consciously out of self-interest.

Yes, the cognitive distortion issue. But as I noted above, I think the evidence suggests that the anti-choicers need to strongly evaluate their views at least as much as the pro-choicers do. I likewise believe that many Non-MAPs do not consciously believe they have any form of bigotry. Being a Non-MAP in today's society grants one an easy bias towards sincerely believing that the anti-choice stance has nothing to do with their personal sensibilities or gerontocentric entitlements. Also, the fact that anti-choice and anti-youth sentiments are currently accepted by mainstream thought gives them all the more incentive not to think very objectively about the issue, or look at and consider the available data with any degree of sincere objectivity. Not only that, but I believe it makes total sense that many anti-choice MAPs are likely to be deeply affected by a lifelong indoctrination, including in the belief that contemporary Western and Northern institutions are inherently good (even if imperfect), even if they do not consciously take that stance for political reasons. Every oppressed minority group in the past who were once in the same proverbial boat that MAPs now find themselves in had large numbers within their ranks which acceded to the mainstream views of the time.

Undoubtedly there are unconscious influences on my thinking, and it's a matter of sorting out what they might be as relevant to this situation. If you think I am actively lying, that is a more serious accusation. I'm curious which you think in my case. Either view is of course acceptable at the level of what's permitted discourse.

I think you believe that you are somehow serving the greater good, as you see it, by being dishonest about certain things. So, to be specific, I'm not calling you a malicious liar, who lies for the sake of being nasty and dishonest. Rather, I believe you think it's necessary and even honorable to deliberately make false statements or ignore certain evidence if that's what it it takes to preserve a basic system and institutions which you sincerely believe to be deserving of your loyalty, and to which you have become accustomed to and comfortable with throughout the course of your life.





Dissident





Follow ups:

Post a response :

Nickname Password
E-mail (optional)
Subject







Link URL (optional)
Link Title (optional)

Add your sigpic?