Following Jeffrey Epstein's death, we have learned where he found his justification for raping teenage girls. He explained to an interviewer that, "criminalizing sex with teenage girls was a cultural aberration, and that at times in history it was perfectly acceptable.” “He pointed out that homosexuality had long been considered a crime and was still punishable by death in some parts of the world.”
Various social science disciplines, especially cultural anthropology and sociology, enlighten every freshman with the brilliant insight that the world's 7.7 billion people don't agree on every point of right and wrong, and today's norms can vary from those of past societies. This truth is banal and harmless enough, but then these "scientists" pull a fast only and imply that since values have varied, there is NO objective morality. The values and rules we live by are just arbitrary and were simply invented willy-nilly by someone in the past. They are mere conventions, so when your mom tells you sex with underage girls is wrong, you can say that many cultures have not had a problem with it, and rules against it are merely prejudice and superstition. This technique makes it very easy to follow your desires, whatever they may be.
Of course, these social scientists are either fools or liars. The question of objective morality--whether there is right and wrong independent of what people think--is not answered by the fact that cultures have varied on what is moral. Objective morality might exist, and like a bullseye, has been missed by various degrees by various cultures. But since the one cardinal rule for social thinkers is that "all cultures are equal," then it becomes impossible for some groups to be better shots than others.
These are questions for philosophers, not dumbass sociologists. Social scientists pose as if they are value-neutral, or at least they used to, but they constantly smuggle in their "anything goes" value systems, although "systems" give their thinking too much credit. And they are too obtuse to see how their bad philosophy helps the Epsteins of the world commit their crimes.
Are gun owners mentally ill?
Some anti-gun people think owning a gun is a sign of some kind of mental abnormality. According to General Social Survey data, gun owners ...
More to the point: If social scientists had anything approaching scientific ethics they would insist that the Federal Government and Supreme Court never, under any circumstances, apply their research findings without protecting individual consent to the resulting social experiments. They'd be fanatical about the 10th Amendment: States should have border arbitrary border enforcement authority consistent with through-passage. Likewise States should have have no authority to keep prisoners that would be accepted by another State. Material support of "civil rights" should be in the form of relocation. Other practical matters of ensuring individual consent should be on the same order of national priority as military defense. This would replace the 14th's monstrous interpretations during the 20th century with a a true Laboratory of the States.
ReplyDelete1. Objective morality is an evolutionary delusion. It doesn't exist:
ReplyDeletehttps://helian.net/blog/2015/03/15/morality/the-objective-morality-delusion-2/
https://helian.net/blog/2020/01/18/morality/objective-morality-the-ethical-intuitionism-gambit/
https://helian.net/blog/2019/06/28/morality/morality-philosophy-and-the-unicorn-criterion/
It is not "relativism" to point out this obvious scientific fact.
2. "Adolescence" is a modern social construct with no basis in biology. According to biology (and the vast majority of cultures around the world and throughout history, including that of the Bible) a person becomes an adult when they reach puberty (12-14). Hence why "child" marriage and much of what modern Westerners call "pedophilia" is common all over the world and history.