For what reasons should we despise racism?
You could say that, unquestionably, racism is one of the hottest issues of 2020.
Let's dissect it philosophically, if we can :)
Let's start with the most basic and move outwards. If I miss anything, please post it in the comments below.
1) Racism is bad, because it hurts blacks and minorities - physically and emotionally. (if you believe white people can be included, please say your response. I will probably only direct these points at blacks and minorities).
2) Racism places blacks and minorities in worse off social, educational, and economic situations.
3) Racism creates a hostile, dangerous, and drug ridden environment.
4) Racism creates a poor environment for young girls, leading to domestic violence and prostitution.
5) Racism bars blacks and minorities from entering well-off areas like better jobs, healthcare, education, and housing.
6) Racism teaches whites to be socially degenerate. It encourages whites to become violent, hateful, mistrustful, leading to an overall social decline in society.
7) Racism prevents intelligent blacks and minorities from contributing to the arts, sciences, technology, literary, and other fields.
8) Racism suggests that blacks, who make up only 13% of the population, are responsible for a lot of problems in the United States, including crime, violence, and social degeneracy.
9) Racism teaches us that one race is superior to another, simply because that race has certain qualities not found in another race. For example, the quality of lighter skin.
10) Racism causes cultural wars, leading to some kind of a civil war.
---------------------------------------
So how do we approach racism? For what reasons should we stop being racist?
I guess one could say that the reason we should stop being racist is for some or all of the reasons above. In general, racism hurts a lot of people. But there is a problem here. We don't actually know that the external world exists. So when someone says the N word, a person could say that they are dreaming and has uttered the N word in his dream. So why should they stop uttering the N word, if they have no real reason to believe they are hurting anyone.
For this reason, I believe only a solipsism-tian argument will suffice against racism.
But what would an extreme solipsism-ist say? Perhaps they would say that they don't believe they are hurting anyone by being racist. However, even if I am not hurting anyone by being racist, I should still not be a racist because it will help me develop good moral qualities or a better mind. In other words, I only know that my mind exists, therefore, I should perfect it. Being racist would mean a less perfect mind. Therefore, I should be a non-racist to achieve a more perfect mind. (for example, I wouldn't hurt any other living creature, like a parrot, just because it possessed different physical and mental qualities)
What do you guys/gals think of this argument? Do we actually "truly" know that we are hurting anyone in the external world by being racist? Even if the external world hurt us back, like a black guy punching you in the face for calling him the N word, we still can't be sure if it's just an illusion. Albeit, it would still hurt.
Perhaps avoiding pain is another good argument for not being racist. Like a black guy punching you in the face or maybe even a more serious injury.
I guess the other argument is: even if the world is just an illusion, that doesn't mean I'd jump from a skyscraper, because based on my previous sensory experience, I know that would hurt.
However, here we can resort to Hume-ean doubt, that the past gives no indication of the future. So technically, again, one could say that uttering the N word in front of a black guy does not necessarily mean that I would experience pain. Nonetheless, even a solipsism-ist would experience the paradox of avoiding extreme pain in the external world. However, in an absolute abstract sense that disregards our extreme fear of pain, the Hume-ean argument would hold, i think.
For these reasons, I think we are left solely with a solipsism-tian argument for not being racist.
Comments? Thoughts?
I understand that this is a hot issue, so there may be a lot of negativity about my thread, which is fine.
Let's dissect it philosophically, if we can :)
Let's start with the most basic and move outwards. If I miss anything, please post it in the comments below.
1) Racism is bad, because it hurts blacks and minorities - physically and emotionally. (if you believe white people can be included, please say your response. I will probably only direct these points at blacks and minorities).
2) Racism places blacks and minorities in worse off social, educational, and economic situations.
3) Racism creates a hostile, dangerous, and drug ridden environment.
4) Racism creates a poor environment for young girls, leading to domestic violence and prostitution.
5) Racism bars blacks and minorities from entering well-off areas like better jobs, healthcare, education, and housing.
6) Racism teaches whites to be socially degenerate. It encourages whites to become violent, hateful, mistrustful, leading to an overall social decline in society.
7) Racism prevents intelligent blacks and minorities from contributing to the arts, sciences, technology, literary, and other fields.
8) Racism suggests that blacks, who make up only 13% of the population, are responsible for a lot of problems in the United States, including crime, violence, and social degeneracy.
9) Racism teaches us that one race is superior to another, simply because that race has certain qualities not found in another race. For example, the quality of lighter skin.
10) Racism causes cultural wars, leading to some kind of a civil war.
---------------------------------------
So how do we approach racism? For what reasons should we stop being racist?
I guess one could say that the reason we should stop being racist is for some or all of the reasons above. In general, racism hurts a lot of people. But there is a problem here. We don't actually know that the external world exists. So when someone says the N word, a person could say that they are dreaming and has uttered the N word in his dream. So why should they stop uttering the N word, if they have no real reason to believe they are hurting anyone.
For this reason, I believe only a solipsism-tian argument will suffice against racism.
But what would an extreme solipsism-ist say? Perhaps they would say that they don't believe they are hurting anyone by being racist. However, even if I am not hurting anyone by being racist, I should still not be a racist because it will help me develop good moral qualities or a better mind. In other words, I only know that my mind exists, therefore, I should perfect it. Being racist would mean a less perfect mind. Therefore, I should be a non-racist to achieve a more perfect mind. (for example, I wouldn't hurt any other living creature, like a parrot, just because it possessed different physical and mental qualities)
What do you guys/gals think of this argument? Do we actually "truly" know that we are hurting anyone in the external world by being racist? Even if the external world hurt us back, like a black guy punching you in the face for calling him the N word, we still can't be sure if it's just an illusion. Albeit, it would still hurt.
Perhaps avoiding pain is another good argument for not being racist. Like a black guy punching you in the face or maybe even a more serious injury.
I guess the other argument is: even if the world is just an illusion, that doesn't mean I'd jump from a skyscraper, because based on my previous sensory experience, I know that would hurt.
However, here we can resort to Hume-ean doubt, that the past gives no indication of the future. So technically, again, one could say that uttering the N word in front of a black guy does not necessarily mean that I would experience pain. Nonetheless, even a solipsism-ist would experience the paradox of avoiding extreme pain in the external world. However, in an absolute abstract sense that disregards our extreme fear of pain, the Hume-ean argument would hold, i think.
For these reasons, I think we are left solely with a solipsism-tian argument for not being racist.
Comments? Thoughts?
I understand that this is a hot issue, so there may be a lot of negativity about my thread, which is fine.
Comments (52)
Are you admitting that the topic is designed to troll?
That's a good point, but I'm considering this from a solipsism perspective.
No, I'm not trying to troll.
You knowingly designed an OP that you believed may produce "a lot of negativity." Why would you do that if not to troll?
This is not designed to troll. It's an application of Cartesian and Solipsism-tian doubt to the issue of racism. (and Hume-ean doubt)
If you say so. In any case, there’s no reason that couldn’t be done in a way that would not produce “a lot of negativity,” as you say. But you’ve deliberately chosen to present it in a way that you believe will produce a lot of negativity. There is only one explanation for why you would do this, and the fact that you have no other explanation further supports the regrettable conclusion.
I did not design this discussion to troll.
Perhaps it’s your habit then. Will you admit that much?
I appreciate you replying to my thread, but all I can say to your comment is I did not design this to troll.
Your the one trolling this thread you puttz.
Why dont you ask him how many times he beats his wife a day while youre at it.
You are poison to discourse.
That's fine DingoJones. I still appreciate Praxis reply.
I notice you haven’t addressed the topic whatsoever. Too tired after beating your wife, perhaps?
I'm sure no one here beats their wife. There's no reason to start fighting like this.
Okay then, we’ll chalk it up to habit. That established, there’s no reason for you not to edit the OP in order to make it less likely to produce a lot of negativity and more likely to produce whatever it is that you intended it to produce.
I appreciate your response praxis, but again the only thing I will say to this is I did not design this to troll.
How do you know? Dingo brought it up, maybe he’s projecting.
You appear to be saying that you’re unwilling to edit the OP in order to be less negativity producing.
At this time, I will not be editing the OP. Again, the only thing I will say is I did not design this to troll. And I don't believe we should suspect Dingo of any kind of domestic abuse :)
We should certainly stop being racist for the wrong reasons.
Thank you for your response Bitter Crank, but how would you consider Cartesian, Solipsism-tian, and Hume-ean ideas applied to this? Or let me add this, you believe that applying these principles will cause us to be not-racist for the wrong reasons. But aren't these principles the bedrock of philosophy and we are on a philosophical forum?
Ok, thanks for your comments :) ... good or bad
uQuoting telex
So, I am being asked to object to an objection to using certain language while also doubting the reality of what I perceive?
If the latter is the case, the former is meaningless.
Perhaps a solipsism-ist in this sense is still bound to their sense organs from which sense data can be gathered, like the use of a certain language. Perhaps it's an example that can be used, while itself may be meaningless, but nonetheless, can be used to express a point.
That is the "sense data" we gathered from what we "perceive" to be a "real world." So, perhaps it's an example that can be used, while itself may be meaningless, but nonetheless, can be used to express a point
If you want to argue about matters on those terms, you should own them.
Those matters cannot be owned, because as Descartes pointed out, an Evil Genius can deceive us about any or all of our sensory experience. However, even though this data may be meaningless, it can, nonetheless, be used to illustrate a point.
You are not owning the presumptions of your list of why people are racists. This Cartesian stuff is just a sideshow to your own deficits.
Descartes later-meditations, after the Evil Genius hypothesis, in those he does reach the idea that God is good and would not deceive him or us. However, I believe the central thesis to this is the Evil Genius. He provides no real argument for a good God, in my opinion. The Evil Genius is the real point here, that we cannot trust our senses.
I cannot own the presumptions on my list, because the sense data we receive from the external world can be highly doubted. The Cartesian stuff is not a sideshow, but a necessary doubt in philosophy. I cannot call these deficits, if they're true ideas of philosophy.
reports of what is going on around you?
Using our 'sense organs,' we gather 'sense data' from the "perceived" external world.
It doesn't seem like that to me. Nonetheless, I appreciate your comments.
This same line applies here: However, even though this data may be meaningless, it can, nonetheless, be used to illustrate a point.
What is "here"? What is a "point"?
"Here" is your post.
"Point" is the discussion.
Do you renounce that part or want to argue for something from that point of view?
The language about race can be considered "sense data" from the external world. The premise or premises do not imply any belief about the external world, until we reach the final conclusion. It's all one point of view, no matter how real the external world may seem!
Many are racist for the wrong reasons, because they’re ignorant. The right reason is that it offers an advantage or privileged position, simply. Holding that position requires subduing our moral sense of fairness, caring, liberty, and others.
Ignorant people can’t believe that they’re morally deficient so their cognitive dissonance is resolved in believing that the object of their subjugation is inherently bad or evil, and their prejudice deepens and becomes malignantly maladaptive to themselves as well as others.
So I suppose that only a sociopath can be racist for the right reason.
Quoting telex
What the point? (if not to troll)
The point here is about the solipsism-ist argument from the OP.
And the point is?
It's all in the OP. It delves from Cartesian doubt about the external world, to Hume-ean skepticism, and finally arriving at a solipsism-ist position. Quoting just one line does no justice to the entire OP.
Obviously we judge people by the way they look. It is probably a throwback in our genes to the days when our ancestors lived in small groups and had to be wary of other groups. For whatever my past experiences are, I have become wary of people who hold certain expressions on their face. I still will reserve judgment until they actually engage in behavior, but my guard goes up and down by the way a person carries themselves. It is obvious that I would engage in seriously fundamental and possibly dangerous error if I judge someone by the color of their skin, eyes or hair.
If you look up "race" in Wikipedia the article indicates that the genetic differences between races are less than variations within a so-called race. I have also noticed this in my everyday life, and to a certain extent, I tend to believe that we are all, on average, equally different and similar members of the one race (human race). The power of the human is not in how they look, it is how they think. I like this forum because it illustrates people's thoughts. I have no idea what race any one here would be ascribed. I can only tell whether you wrote something smart or not.
We should despise racism because it is intellectually wrong and faulty.
That is true. Something external must exist. Somewhere there is a real world. However, this world could only be an illusion. The other problem is, if we do wake up in another world, we may never know if it's the real world or not. No matter what world we travel too, we may never know if it's the real world or simply another illusion.
While we may "believe" that we hold reasonable beliefs about the external world, our senses can always deceive us. Of course, we may draw examples from "that" "perceived" external world, to fuel our thoughts for thinking.
The truest form of thoughts would or may reside in idealism. What is ultimately true. Our moral beliefs may also be grounded in idealism, if we can think of "abstract" examples to which we can express our moral thoughts on.
(thank you for your comment, whether or not you think I wrote something smart or not)
You claimed that there’s a point but are apparently unable to find one.