You Can't Say That On LJ

[jackofallgeeks]

People don't like being told they're wrong.
It's a simple fact that I think anone out there can confirm. I can't imagine what it would be like for anyone who LIKED to be told they're wrong, and I would argue the point that none is even indifferent to being wrong.
People like to know they're right.

One of the best pieces of advice I've ever been given - though I can't remember if it was specifically directed towards writing or acting - is that, to have a believable villain, be must believe that what he is doing is justified, if not good.

It's also become evident to me that people don't like to hear what their faults are - and the closer a remark is to what someone precieves to be a personmal failing, the less they like to hear it.
I had a personal example just a moment ago, but it's left me...
(And no, I don't intend that to be a sarcastic allusion to my poor memory.)

I think, perhaps, that to understand where I'm going with this, you have to understand two points: that i'm driven by conviction, and that I beliieve in objective morality.
I'm sure you're all aware of the facts of those two point, but I'd like to expand, if only a bit, on the implications.

First off, I am driven by conviction. Though I would argue that I'm not so cut-and-dry as to be pidgion-holed into one category or another, I believe X, Y, and Z, and I'm convinced of their truth. This is not to say I know, absolutely and without a doubt, that what I believe is actually the truth. The subtlty may be a difficult one, but while I am convinced of X, if it were to come about that I were convinced of not-X, I am prepared to adjust my beliefs. However, I stand secure in my certainty because I have not yet been shown reasonable arguments for not-X, and have no reason to doubt X. Even speaking with nif, with as valid points as she makes, hasn't yet caused me to falter. I question, yes - I question all the time, because to do otherwise would be to fall into fanaticism. As I told Trevor just the other night, there are two things I don't want to be - someone who claims to believe in X, but doesn't act like it; and someone who believes in X, but doesn't understand what that means. I want to be someone who not only believes, but also understands WHY he believes, and acts accordingly.

The second point readily follows from the first (or perhaps, it's more that the first follows from the second), and that is that I believe in objective morality - or more broadly, objective truth. That is to say, there are things that are and are not; and, on a moral level, things that are right and things that are wrong. I don't mean to say that ethics is mathmatical, or that you can be CERTAIN of morality in a given situation, but the fact remains that things are right and wrong.This means that people do bad things. I do, you do, EVERYONE does things which are wrong. We should strive to do what is right, but we aren't perfect. Following this, not everything we think or even feel is nessisarily good, either.

All of that being said - you know what bothers me? It bothers me when people claim a subjective morality - that things are only right or wrong if you believe they are. Perhaps you can't truely be held accountable for the full gravity of your actions if you don't know them to be wrong. But the universe did not alter itself when we learned the world was round - it had ALWAYS been round, we just knew the truth of the matter then.
Truth is truth, no matter what you think of it.

The REASON this bothers me is, I should think, evident from the preceeding paragraphs. it seems to me that saying something is wrong only if you think it's wrong removes all acountability on the part of the person. First off, NO ONE does something they think is wrong - there's always some justification as to why someone does X or Y. And following from that is the idea that Subjective Morality claims that no one ever does anything wrong - that whatever anyone does at any given time is good, almost solely because they did it. And it also implies that one thing could be good at one moment, and bad at another moment, just because he who acts changes his system of belief.

In essence, all I've said is the this perspective seems to be the polar opposite of everything I'm convinced of. That is, it seems Subjective Reality is the opposite of Objective Reality.
But then, isn't that evident?

---

Slogans
A Steve A Day Helps You Work, Rest and Play.
The Steve Of A New Generation.
Got Steve?
A Different Kind Of Company. A Different Kind Of Steve.
This Is Not Your Father's Steve.
We're with the Steve.
You Deserve A Steve Today.
Every Steve Helps.

I Can't Believe It's Not The Advertising Slogan Generator

Comments

Built Steve Tough?

[surichan.livejournal.com]

Andrew... ::shakes head:: You are, as they say, a piece of work.

And now, seriously, I quite liked your post. My brain, however, is not well-equipped at this point to explain why I liked your post. (Second Leslie says: "Comes from being rather dumb in the head-meats, if you ask me, but don't tell her that...") So, I'll leave it at that, and meander away.

[dreamingaloud.livejournal.com]

on a not more related to your subject line... there's a whole hell of a lot you can't say on livejournal. for that matter, all it really is, to be honest, is a mind game, guilt-trip laden popularity contest that seems more like another bad version of high school than anything else. and instead of being honest about things, you filter people out of posts... you are vague... you do everything BUT say what's really real.

i'm rather sick of it, can you tell?

the problem with truth is that each person seems to have their own version of truth. meaning what seems true and right in my life and to me and based on my experience... could be seen as a giant lie in the eyes of the wrong person. which sets up certain people, who are indeed good people, to be thrown down by people on power trips thinking that what THEY believe is right above all else. it is true that truth is truth. but with so many people in the world with their own twisted view on reality... it's hard to get to the COMPLETE truth.

i mean, for example... you and i believe different things. very different, most of the time. we each believe ourselves to be right. we both question outside of our beliefs, but at the core we really stick to what we know to be right based on what our life has given and delt us and the truth we've come to believe based on our upbringing. we are both good people at heart, we both have a good sense of right and wrong... and we both try our best to do good in the world. because our beliefs differ, does that mean one of us is completely wrong and fails to know the truth?

i don't think so. both of us are young and constantly learning, still, about the world around us. how people work. how relationships are. how life treats people of all ages and races and backgrounds. and in this learning experience, we must allow room for change in beliefs. the truth - as WE know it - can change. it does. as you said... people believed and saw it as truth that the world was flat. until someone went questioning, searching... and then the real truth happened. the world was always round. it was just that people didn't know.

this isn't making any damn sense at all. i suppose i'm too conflicted with people in general - and with lies and deception - right now to even go into this subject. i had something valid to say at the start and it got lost in the inane.

but anyway. livejournal. if al hadn't just given me a paid account, i'm pretty sure i would have deleted my journal by this very moment. livejournal has lost it's shine - people whom i once loved to read are now leaving it... and on the whole, it seems like a very fake version of what's true. heh, so maybe that did tie in with what you said. i don't know.

that slogan thing was quick fun, yes? my friend dixie found that and came up with some pretty amusing ones... which is how i got the link.