Old social values you could get behind

Sep 15, 2014
14
0
0
thaluikhain said:
implyingimplications said:
thaluikhain said:
How is this even up for debate?
It's funny how progressives are all for open discussion and debate when they happen to be living under traditions they find uncomfortable, but after they've won and gotten their ill-conceived notions written into law, suddenly any other opinion is beyond the pale of reasonable thought.
You're right, I worded that badly. I should have said "Why does this even need to be debated?" or somesuch.
The sentiment is the same in either case; you seem incapable of stepping into your opponent's shoes or even realizing that someone might have a different opinion. It is self-evident, in your mind, that capital-P Progress is just the bee's knees, and yet you have not defined what "progress" is supposed to mean. Progress from what, towards what? Progress implies movement in a direction, but what direction are we going? Is it necessarily a "good" direction? Have past societies even considered the idea that history could move in one direction? Unless I'm quite mistaken, the traditional (and historically supported) view of history is that civilizations come and go in cycles, irrespective of their level of technological progress or their particular moral views.

thaluikhain said:
implyingimplications said:
I could easily do the same for modern society, though in that case it'd be less like cherry-picking and more like combine harvesting.
Sure, if I was to say that all new values are good ones. That would be remarkable foolish of me.
I see what you did, there. Okay - so let's not assume that either of us is saying that our favorite half of history is uniformly excellent in the realm of social values. Maybe I exaggerated when I said I liked all traditional (western) social values. I suppose that if I dug I'd find a few I dislike, though I can't think of any off the top of my head. Though you must understand when you say things like "Society is supposed to progress", that sounds an awful lot like you're saying that all new social values are better than all old ones.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
14,887
733
118
implyingimplications said:
I see what you did, there. Okay - so let's not assume that either of us is saying that our favorite half of history is uniformly excellent in the realm of social values. Maybe I exaggerated when I said I liked all traditional (western) social values. I suppose that if I dug I'd find a few I dislike, though I can't think of any off the top of my head.
Fair enough, that was the point I was opposed to, that, by virtue of being old, it is automatically better.

implyingimplications said:
Though you must understand when you say things like "Society is supposed to progress", that sounds an awful lot like you're saying that all new social values are better than all old ones.
Perhaps I worded that badly, yes.

What I meant was, society isn't static. The traditional values that you support evolved out of something else, something you'd probably support less. If things are going well, society will improve itself, its values would be better than it had before, which is why I used the word "supposed". And, yes, of course somehow has to sit down and decide what is "better".

In the last few hundred years, western society has changed in various ways most people living today would consider as improvements. We aren't ruled by hereditary monarchs anymore, slavery abolished, democracy was extended to all citizens regardless of race or gender, we protect the rights of workers and children etc.
 

Mossberg Shotty

New member
Jan 12, 2013
649
0
0
Dalisclock said:
I didn't realize you were joking, partially because I've read/heard people seriously say things like "Political Correctness destroying America"(Where "Political Correctness" is code for "Not being racist/homophobic") or more bluntly "If we just treated all middle eastern people as terrorists(Kill them, or imprison them forever), we'd never have to worry about terror attacks the US again".
Nice to know there's no middle ground between genocide and thinking that cultural sensitivity has gone a bit too far. I was joking in the sense that I don't really think the mindsets of yesterday need to make a comeback, there's no place for it in 2014. But I do like certain things about the time period (Fashion, literature, art etc.)
 

Zack Alklazaris

New member
Oct 6, 2011
1,938
0
0
While I would in no way enforce it I believe that having the wife stay at home would benefit the United States. A individual that is always at hand to teach and grow their kids into capable adults. We seem to have much less time to even help kids with homework, much less assist in childhood issues.

Also we'd lose a good chunk of our workforce driving unemployment down.
 

laraem

New member
Sep 17, 2014
22
0
0
Zack Alklazaris said:
While I would in no way enforce it I believe that having the wife stay at home would benefit the United States. A individual that is always at hand to teach and grow their kids into capable adults. We seem to have much less time to even help kids with homework, much less assist in childhood issues.

Also we'd lose a good chunk of our workforce driving unemployment down.
And why the wife? And wait Wife or Mom? Cause you kind of imply with wife that you mean as soon as she's married she can't work.

Plus completely not possible in this economy.

Not to mention how blatantly sexist such a thing would be.
 

Zack Alklazaris

New member
Oct 6, 2011
1,938
0
0
laraem said:
Zack Alklazaris said:
While I would in no way enforce it I believe that having the wife stay at home would benefit the United States. A individual that is always at hand to teach and grow their kids into capable adults. We seem to have much less time to even help kids with homework, much less assist in childhood issues.

Also we'd lose a good chunk of our workforce driving unemployment down.
And why the wife? And wait Wife or Mom? Cause you kind of imply with wife that you mean as soon as she's married she can't work.

Plus completely not possible in this economy.

Not to mention how blatantly sexist such a thing would be.
Studies show children, especially infants are more connected to the mother than the father. Its one of the reasons why you can get pregnancy leave. As a man who is the cook, the cleaner of messes and does the laundry I can see the father staying at home, just thought the mother would have more impact development wise.

And as I said before, I wouldn't enforce it. I just see that a child who manages their own lives tend to have a much harder transitioning period into adulthood. Guidance through experience is a great learning tool.
 

laraem

New member
Sep 17, 2014
22
0
0
Zack Alklazaris said:
laraem said:
Zack Alklazaris said:
While I would in no way enforce it I believe that having the wife stay at home would benefit the United States. A individual that is always at hand to teach and grow their kids into capable adults. We seem to have much less time to even help kids with homework, much less assist in childhood issues.

Also we'd lose a good chunk of our workforce driving unemployment down.
And why the wife? And wait Wife or Mom? Cause you kind of imply with wife that you mean as soon as she's married she can't work.

Plus completely not possible in this economy.

Not to mention how blatantly sexist such a thing would be.
Studies show children, especially infants are more connected to the mother than the father. Its one of the reasons why you can get pregnancy leave. As a man who is the cook, the cleaner of messes and does the laundry I can see the father staying at home, just thought the mother would have more impact development wise.

And as I said before, I wouldn't enforce it. I just see that a child who manages their own lives tend to have a much harder transitioning period into adulthood. Guidance through experience is a great learning tool.
I'd like to see that study and see how it falls in terms of social bias and social influence.

Anywho whatevs if you aren't gonna enforce it your thoughts are your own.
 

Zack Alklazaris

New member
Oct 6, 2011
1,938
0
0
laraem said:
Zack Alklazaris said:
laraem said:
Zack Alklazaris said:
While I would in no way enforce it I believe that having the wife stay at home would benefit the United States. A individual that is always at hand to teach and grow their kids into capable adults. We seem to have much less time to even help kids with homework, much less assist in childhood issues.

Also we'd lose a good chunk of our workforce driving unemployment down.
And why the wife? And wait Wife or Mom? Cause you kind of imply with wife that you mean as soon as she's married she can't work.

Plus completely not possible in this economy.

Not to mention how blatantly sexist such a thing would be.
Studies show children, especially infants are more connected to the mother than the father. Its one of the reasons why you can get pregnancy leave. As a man who is the cook, the cleaner of messes and does the laundry I can see the father staying at home, just thought the mother would have more impact development wise.

And as I said before, I wouldn't enforce it. I just see that a child who manages their own lives tend to have a much harder transitioning period into adulthood. Guidance through experience is a great learning tool.
The studies are mixed, but since you asked.
http://life.familyeducation.com/bonding/mothers/54196.html

I'd like to see that study and see how it falls in terms of social bias and social influence.

Anywho whatevs if you aren't gonna enforce it your thoughts are your own.