Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)D

DragonWasabi

@ DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

Posts
25
Comments
42
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • "I'm not vegan but..." pro-vegan take Reaction: Positive. "I'm vegan and..." same pro-vegan take Reaction: Negative. ???

    Jump

  • "I'm not vegan but..." pro-vegan take Reaction: Positive. "I'm vegan and..." same pro-vegan take Reaction: Negative. ???

    Jump

  • Drugs are candy for adults, and comedy entertainment marketed towards adults is the equivalent of making funny faces/sounds/peekaboos at a baby.

    Jump

  • I'm recognizing how many of the behaviors we see in adults are reflective of newer, upgraded forms of the same behavjor patterns of babies, despite adults often thinking of themselves as serious and mature. It's funny to think of adults as grown babies sometimes.

  • Showerthoughts @lemmy.world
    DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

    Drugs are candy for adults, and comedy entertainment marketed towards adults is the equivalent of making funny faces/sounds/peekaboos at a baby.

  • No Stupid Questions @lemmy.world
    DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

    Are shrunken heads a rights violation?

  • Was banning human slavery an authoritarian decision?

    Jump

  • I would also add that it seems that rights are a human concept/social construct, even just in the sense that we're interpreting what we believe to be ethical/right/moral, even if it's objectively correct; or we're enforcing laws based on what people believe is correct, or in some cases what serves certain people personally at the expense of what most people believe is right if the laws are corrupt/undemocratic.

    So I think if we're going to claim that a certain right "just is", since we're the ones creating these concepts even if it's based on our observation of the world and an interpretation that was theoretically objectively correct if not a belief, it falls on us to rationalise and describe how we're coming to these conclusions and what we're basing this assertion of a certain right on. Otherwise, "it's a human right because it's a human right" is just circular reasoning and has no explanation. How are we formulating our basis for what is a human right? Is it legality? Is it moral beliefs or what we reason (or even logically prove somehow) is objectively morally right? Or ... what?

    For example, in the case of animal rights theory, many people believe that there are moral rights that animals hold as moral patients, i.e. "negative rights" (= freedom from something being done to an individual) not to be exploited and killed by humans (moral agents), which extend logically from the belief (or fact) of human rights also being morally correct. And in this view, humans by way of our laws, do hold legally the "positive rights" (= freedom of an individual to do something) to exploit and kill animals, but these legal rights are simultaneously violating the moral rights of the animals to not have these things done to them by humans/moral agents.

    In this case too, similar to what you said about the human condition, we could argue that something about the condition of animals (which could for example be sentience/consciousness, which they share with humans who are also animals), is the basis for them having these rights, but even then we're still speculating based on what we believe is either subjectively or objectively moral (since in that case obviously what's legal is in contradiction with what's deemed to be moral), and I'm not sure what third definition of rights could be being applied there whether it be in the context of human rights or animal rights.

  • Was banning human slavery an authoritarian decision?

    Jump

  • They weren't a white supremacist and they were in favor of banning slavery while simultaneously believing it to be an authoritarian decision. They were using this to argue that authoritarianism can be justified sometimes. Your comment assumes that saying something is authoritarian means that you're against it.

  • Was banning human slavery an authoritarian decision?

    Jump

  • But authority can be used/imposed to take away some else's authority, can't it? Or can authority only be used to do something to someone, not to prevent someone from doing something?

  • Was banning human slavery an authoritarian decision?

    Jump

  • If it was legal for certain people to slap certain other people, then the people doing the slapping would have the authority over the people being slapped to slap them. But then if the law was changed and took away their authority to slap them, that would be using authority over those slappers to stop them. Does this make sense? Both can be true at the same time

  • Was banning human slavery an authoritarian decision?

    Jump

  • Do you agree that someone can theoretically have a legal right to do something bad (as in, be legally allowed to do it) without that being a good or moral right for them to have?

    I think you're only believing "right" to mean one thing and one thing only, when I'm using it in a sense where legality and morality don't necessarily coincide (even if they do in other contexts, conditionally).

    So when I say they had the legal right to own slaves, and that right was taken away from them, that isn't a matter of opinion/belief because that's factually what happened, but that doesn't mean that I think they had the right morally speaking, which is a different concept.

    I hope this makes sense.

  • Was banning human slavery an authoritarian decision?

    Jump

  • At the time it was a legal right that some humans had, even though it came at the expense of others' moral right (that most people now believe they had, including myself) to be free. Please tell me you understand this. I don't think owning others is a human right in a moral sense, even if it was a legal right for some back then. There is a difference between legal rights and moral rights, because legality is not the same as morality. Sorry if that sounds obvious but I think it's necessary to clarify in order to approach this question with understanding.

  • Was banning human slavery an authoritarian decision?

    Jump

  • Legal rights vs moral rights, that's the confusion.

  • Was banning human slavery an authoritarian decision?

    Jump

  • They legally had that right at the time. I don't think they should have had that right, or that they morally have that right. I think we're talking about 2 different meanings of the term "right". In one sense (legally), they had the right, as in it was codified into law. That's not a belief as much as a fact. The part which concerns my belief is whether I think they should have had the right or if they have the moral right, which I don't. I hope that makes sense.

  • Was banning human slavery an authoritarian decision?

    Jump

  • That's a weird assumption when I said it was good that it was abolished. Humans shouldn't have the right to own slaves is my belief. (But they did have that right at the time legally speaking). Or another way to put it, is that I don't think humans have the moral right to own slaves, even if they did have the legal right. This was a response to someone else telling me that banning slavery was an authoritarian decision. I just wanted to get clarification and try to understand it better.

  • Was banning human slavery an authoritarian decision?

    Jump

  • Thanks, I think this answers my question. Even if it was a majority decision, it seems intuitively like the government (and the majority of people) imposed some kind of authority over the remaining slave owners (who were in the minority), but I understand that generally such a decision wouldn't be considered generally "authoritarian" just because it used that authority, unless it was imposed upon the majority of people.

  • Was banning human slavery an authoritarian decision?

    Jump

  • Just as it imposed authority over them to take away their authority, right?

  • Was banning human slavery an authoritarian decision?

    Jump

  • Removing a kind of authority of the people over other people, but wouldn't it be imposing an authority from the government upon the remaining slave owners?

  • Was banning human slavery an authoritarian decision?

    Jump

  • I agree, but technically it was both protecting human rights and taking away other human rights (to own slaves). Do you see what I mean?

  • Asklemmy @lemmy.ml
    DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

    Was banning human slavery an authoritarian decision?

  • Why do people always assume you're part of a group just because you're defending them?

    Jump

  • Honestly wondering why people do this (why people immediately assume you must be part of any group you're defending). And I didn't think I answered that, but maybe I did and I missed it

  • No Stupid Questions @lemmy.world
    DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

    Why do people always assume you're part of a group just because you're defending them?

  • Is it considered ableism to treat someone unfairly with regard to their health condition(s) even if they're not a recognised disability?

    Jump

  • Just want to add that I think it's unfortunate that people dismiss anxiety issues by saying "everyone has that". While it's true most people might experience some anxiety, I don't think everyone has the same level of anxiety, and not everyone has an extremely debilitating type of anxiety to where it warrants an understanding that they might struggle more with some things and deserve some leeway or simply understanding and empathy.

  • YSK that chiropractors are not medical doctors and "Systematic reviews... have found no evidence that chiropractic manipulation is effective"

    Jump

  • Yes, there are. But there also some clinics that have chiropractors in training who aren't as qualified to do chiropractic as experienced chiropractors. I know a place where they use chiropractors who are still in training and developing experience, and lots of people say to avoid it and go to more professional chiropractors.

  • No Stupid Questions @lemmy.world
    DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

    Is it considered ableism to treat someone unfairly with regard to their health condition(s) even if they're not a recognised disability?

  • No Stupid Questions @lemmy.world
    DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

    Snot rocketing is gross... but if you don't have tissues, what are you going to do?

  • Asklemmy @lemmy.ml
    DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

    While half-asleep, I heard and saw my door creak and open wide. Then when I woke up later, it was fully closed. Is it possible I hallucinated it?

  • Television @lemmy.world
    DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

    Shows with the same quirky/surreal blend of dark comedy and lighthearted humour as Arrested Development and Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt?

  • No Stupid Questions @lemmy.world
    DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

    Is Kim Kardashian a princess?

  • No Stupid Questions @lemmy.world
    DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

    Is there an alternative to "motherfucker" that people would actually use?

  • Ask Lemmy @lemmy.world
    DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

    Does the American accent or British accent sound better?

  • Asklemmy @lemmy.ml
    DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

    Why can big beards make a man look immediately crazy?

  • Asklemmy @lemmy.ml
    DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

    If someone's pronouns are any/all, what should I use or how should I determine how to refer to you and what pronouns to use?

  • Ask Lemmy @lemmy.world
    DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

    What's something that you hate about all (or most) people?

  • No Stupid Questions @lemmy.world
    DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

    Are straws an unnecessary (but convenient) invention?

  • Asklemmy @lemmy.ml
    DragonWasabi @monyet.cc

    Could child labor ever be acceptable if it's done consentually?