sh.itjust.works Main Community

7705 readers

3 users here now

Home of the sh.itjust.works instance.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

TheDude@sh.itjust.works

manifex@sh.itjust.works

biela@sh.itjust.works

imaqtpie@sh.itjust.works

does sh.itjust.works allow criticism of CCP? (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 1 year ago by wriggly3171@sh.itjust.works to c/main@sh.itjust.works

221 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I have seen that the lemmy.ml mods will openly ban discussion about the CCP. I am wondering if the sh.itjust.works team allows criticism of government bodies, while still banning racism.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] nanoUFO@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well the reason you care about those thing is because ingroup bias and psychological hard wiring to care about people that share the same genes as you. Also some of that sounds like I don't want to value those things just because it's popular to value those things. Though those things don't have to be and probably aren't independent from externalities of others. Seem to me a major fault with Egoism is thinking that people cannot share externalities. Though I don't really know much about it.

A part of Stoicism is also contributing positivity in some way to society. I'm not really a fan of anarchism as a whole, don't think it really solves anything and tries to state a solution to modern society by reducing it down to a more simplified form with less rules but doesn't prove to me that this leads to a better society/world.

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/9658-violence-is-the-last-refuge-of-the-incompetent

You almost made me believe that I read that quote from somewhere else 😅

[–] god@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

A major part of egoism is actually a union of egoists. It's not like we aren't social beings, or that we are unaffected by others and are unaffected by our effect on others. Regardless of any person's beliefs, humans in general are empathetic and gregarious.

Egoists might align with anarchism but I don't think that most egoists even think much about how to improve "society" itself. To generalize egoists is, in general, a bad idea, though, because it's a very generic concept that can fit into many many thought currents. Regarding society, every hierarchy "claims" you in a way. You belong to a ruler, to your family, to society, to civilization, to humanity, etc., Each of those categories impose certain duties on you.

It's like muslims have women cover themselves. Does belonging to society mean that they should follow these rules? Then there's the "outer society", human civilization, which is idealized here in the west as having something to do with free will and such, but this is a minority thought, and most people don't agree. So which of all the outer societes' rules should they follow? I think most prescriptive philosophical currents claim to be the "one true best way of doing things", and then you have to look at an index of 1397 major currents to find it, and you see the dislike count for the one you like and there's 5.5 billion dislikes for being too *insert pejorative descriptor*.

In the end society as an observable organism is real, but as a collective deserving loyalty, I think that's way more subjective.

Downloading this Foundation 7 book bundle.

Also, my favorite kdrama actress just starred in a new drama that was just released. "See You In My 19th Life". Seems I will have to obsessively binge that too.

U got any recommended readings on stoicism that are from this century? I tried reading Marcus Aurelius. It doesn't really explain the why of anything.