The Great Hippo wrote:We're clearly getting off topic, but I have to ask: How is this any different than assigning negative moral value to writing about a house-wife? Both reinforce things you've defined as 'bad'. Under your view, they strike me as equivalent.
My apologies, I was using 'immoral' and the like as shorthand for 'bad' or 'damaging' in that particular post. I clarified on that usage a couple of posts ago, but I've been using it ambiguously since then. An individual writing about a housewife is undeniably damaging to non-housewives, but I don't believe it's morally condemnable in any significant way.
The Great Hippo wrote:That's... the opposite of what I was saying? I think the people in a society are blameworthy, but society itself is just a singular shorthand for a group of people. Maybe this is just a semantic issue, but I don't think it's useful to blame society or hold it responsible. If circumcision of infants is evil, then the people who are engaging in it are engaged in an evil act, and they can be blamed for it.
Indeed, that's what I thought you believed. I was stating that I believed that while individuals are not blameworthy, the structure that they form is. You, on the other hand, believe that people are morally blameworthy, but the structures they form are not (nor are they particularly meaningful to discuss). Using the neuron analogy, I concluded that the structure is morally blameworthy even though it was constructed of non-blameworthy components.
Izawwlgood wrote:It sounds like you're suggesting that you have this totalitarian idea of what is socially optimal for society, and everyone must abide by this paradigm or risk being morally abhorrent for perpetuating the oppressive status quo.
I would suggest that that is simply the opposite of what you seem to be working to eliminate; removing all choice from the individual (so they cannot circumcise, say) is no different from placing all individuals in a society that expects everyone circumcise. Thankfully, neither is, nor should be, a reality.
I'm not sure why you felt the need to slippery-slope fallacy what I said, but your bizarre conclusions are absolutely not logical extrapolations of my arguments. Stating that society-wide biases generally imply discrimination against a minority is support for your absurd dystopia in no way, shape or form.