Ariana Grande

[Malcolm]

We can continue on the current course and tear down decent people and continue to idolize the Kardashians and Kanye and Miley, or we can shoot higher.

Idolize might be a bit strong. I don't idolize a sideshow; I watch it for entertainment.

[TPRJones]

I think it's human nature to have people that are admired.

I suspect this is learned behaviour rather than ingrained.

But even so, isn't it better to look up to someone that has nothing about them that can be torn down? If someone is so easily besmirched then they probably weren't worth idolizing.

[GORDON]

Everyone has to learn morality from somewhere. If you aren't getting it from a church, hopefully you are learning it from family... someone who might genuinely give a crap about you beyond what you can do for them. After that, we look up to those we perceive as stronger... in the past, that meant "great" people, thinkers of thoughts, but more often doers of deeds. If we tear down everyone perceived as worthy of emulation, who teaches us what to strive for? The social justice warriors?

[TPRJones]

Okay, but that still doesn't address my final question. If someone could be so easily torn down then how were they worth emulating?

[Malcolm]

Everyone has to learn morality from somewhere. ... If we tear down everyone perceived as worthy of emulation, who teaches us what to strive for? The social justice warriors?

I've omitted the problematic parts. But here they are, separate from the rest of the statement.

If you aren't getting it from a church, hopefully you are learning it from family

A church has little, if any, room to speak on morality. It almost doesn't even matter what religion it is, either. Religion is used as a social control. While I don't disagree there are spiritual aspects, it ascribes far, far too much power to mortal human beings who've been "divinely" inspired or chosen. It doesn't matter what particulars fill in that mad lib, I'm not having any of it pollute my sense of ethics. If a god or gods want to inspire some worship, grow some 'nads, cowboy up, and hang out with the little folk again instead of sending us crappy imitators and greedy false douchebags.

The fact I've seen decent people emerge from shitty gene pools also puts your second item into question.

After that, we look up to those we perceive as stronger... in the past, that meant "great" people, thinkers of thoughts, but more often doers of deeds.

There are people who were "great" at something. George Washington was a great leader of men, but one of the worst military generals in history. He helped start the Seven Years War because of his itchy trigger finger. It doesn't matter what great man you can find, he's still a man with plenty of flaws. If you want perfect role models, go read a book or watch a movie.

The ultimate source of your behaviour is you. Your morality is what you can wake up to in a mirror the next day without guilt, shame, or regret. It doesn't matter how much the outside world tries to pound it into you. You also can't predict whatever tiny thing might avalanche into a once-in-a-lifetime learning experience for you because something "clicks" with your empathy.



Edited By Malcolm on 1436910373

[Alhazad]

Okay, but that still doesn't address my final question. If someone could be so easily torn down then how were they worth emulating?

I feel like you're only playing devil's advocate at this point.

[Malcolm]

Okay, but that still doesn't address my final question. If someone could be so easily torn down then how were they worth emulating?

Eh, what "tears someone down" in one dude's eyes makes him a hero in another's and doesn't mean dick to a third pair. Everyone's got a weak point you can hammer on, but it doesn't take away from their accomplishments in other areas.

This dude was one of the smartest motherfuckers that ever lived and is included in any serious list of such. Period. He also believed you could logically reason out there's an afterlife and divine beings and was so paranoid towards the end of his life that he refused to eat food unless his wife prepared it for him. He died of malnutrition when she was hospitalized. He's also the dude who nearly didn't get naturalized when he examined the Constitution a little too closely.

On December 5, 1947, Einstein and Morgenstern accompanied Gödel to his U.S. citizenship exam, where they acted as witnesses. Gödel had confided in them that he had discovered an inconsistency in the U.S. Constitution that would allow the U.S. to become a dictatorship. Einstein and Morgenstern were concerned that their friend's unpredictable behavior might jeopardize his application.

He was batshit insane in many ways. He was unspeakably brilliant in many others. Maybe they complement each other or balance out, or maybe they just are. He is still a dude worthy of emulation and admiration.



Edited By Malcolm on 1436912078

[TPRJones]

I feel like you're only playing devil's advocate at this point.

While this is frequently the case, I'm really not this time. I still don't accept the premises but was curious about this point. Malcolm had a good answer, although it does raise questions about the relevance of the "we tear everyone down" issue in that the very meaning of that is entirely subjective.

[Malcolm]

One man's tear down is another's revelation of truth.

[GORDON]

I feel like you're only playing devil's advocate at this point.

While this is frequently the case, I'm really not this time. I still don't accept the premises but was curious about this point. Malcolm had a good answer, although it does raise questions about the relevance of the "we tear everyone down" issue in that the very meaning of that is entirely subjective.

I think an underlying concern is that when a fascism takes over a country, one of the things they want to do is erase the heroes from the collective consciousness. They don't fit the proper narrative.

There's an argument to be made that this is happening now.

[Malcolm]

What heroes are being erased? We've been doing that forever. Without Ben Arnold, we probably lose the pivotal battle of the Revolutionary War. Ben was pissed because retards like this got more props than he did. Ben's wife was a princess and had him whipped, so he sold out to the highest bidder when he figured the retards that sat in their tents like pussies had a higher value than real soldiers who loaded their testicles into cannons, shot themselves in the middle of British regiments, and bludgeoned them to death with their fifty pound cocks*. The Continental Army blew Arnold off and kept overall command with the prick that ended up trying to stage the first military coup in our country's history.

* may not have happened

It is the way of the world; old things go away, new ones replace them. It's not some 1984esque conspiracy.



Edited By Malcolm on 1436925263

[Vince]

I think it's human nature to have people that are admired.

I suspect this is learned behaviour rather than ingrained.

But even so, isn't it better to look up to someone that has nothing about them that can be torn down? If someone is so easily besmirched then they probably weren't worth idolizing.

I'd suggest it isn't a learned behavior because every culture across the world does it and has done it for as long as they have a historical record.

[Malcolm]

I think it's human nature to have people that are admired.

I suspect this is learned behaviour rather than ingrained.

But even so, isn't it better to look up to someone that has nothing about them that can be torn down? If someone is so easily besmirched then they probably weren't worth idolizing.

I'd suggest it isn't a learned behavior because every culture across the world does it and has done it for as long as they have a historical record.

The culture might try to promote out the hero. Veneration of the hero (not the same as the hero's traits) is an individual, personal thing which is borne out by the fact that everyone has a different set of them. A desire to possess traits that one observes isn't cultural nor does it requires you to like the person that has them. I'm kind of stepping on this guy's toes, since this is really his bag.



Edited By Malcolm on 1436982695

[Malcolm]

If you want perfect role models, go read a book or watch a movie.

Here's someone bitching Harper Lee's second novel has tarnished the sterling bulwark of moral righteousness that is (was) Atticus Finch.

[Alhazad]

Here's someone bitching Harper Lee's second novel has tarnished the sterling bulwark of moral righteousness that is (was) Atticus Finch.

Uh...

I’m pleased and not a little surprised to be able to report, however, that for all the controversy [...] "Go Set a Watchman” is, in fact, a complete book. And if it’s a highly uneven one, it’s still worth reading at a moment when we’re grappling yet again with [...] the idea that good people can do poisonous things.

If finding that he’s not what we needed him to be disconcerts some readers, that doesn’t mean, as NPR’s Maureen Corrigan suggested, that “This Atticus is different in kind, not just degree: He’s like Ahab turned into a whale lover or Holden Caulfield a phony.”

[Malcolm]

Tearing down more historical figures...

Lincoln did not believe slavery was morally wrong, nor did he think slaves, of African-Americans in general, should be considered "equal" to whites. And the clincher: he really freed the slaves because the Union needed more soldiers.

[Malcolm]

British get pissed when someone finds footage Elizabeth II doing something socially acceptable until about 1939.