We are not equal

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I know but I think that equality is also one of the bunch.

The reason I asked is because you said:

Better to step aside and allow an old philosopher, or politician, or a bureaucrat decide what opportunity, worth, rights and value, really are.

The fact is that to the average person what the old philosopher thinks doesn't matter, unless he is teaching the politician, and the bureaucrat can only follow the policies that the politician puts into effect. The only one that really matters is the politician and most people might get temporary amnesia around election time but eventually they are reminded why politicians are not to be trusted.

No need to apologize, I know that I usually write like I'm going to be charged by the word and that makes it hard to grasp what I mean.

I get the OP and agree with much of it. I have often seen your posts and get the part about words and ideas not being obectively real but you have to admit that they are about all we have to work with when we seek to work things out without action.

Funny how there seems to be an urban idiom that describes that, "Snip just got real".

4 “You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. 5 “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

or greater than or lesser than..
we have the ability to make such decisions but not the wisdom to make them wisely
we have millions of tiny bacteria in our digestive track and surely we feel we are greater than those tiny little creatures
that is of course till we do something stupid to wipe out all of those tiny friends of ours and end up having to deal with the consequences...

obviously the ceo feels he is greater than the workers under him and therefore feels entitles to all that money he earns but well if he were to ever lose those workers he would also lose his greatness.

and a good orchestra conductor can blend all of the different tones and notes from the many instruments that are at his command but can you take any one instrument out without the music ending up missing some of it's beauty? and if all the instrument players laid down those instruments and decided to be conductors would there be any music at all?

just because we lack the wisdom to see the equality doesn't mean it's not there it just means that the music we create isn't so beautiful has too many wannabe conductors and great musicians playing instruments that someone else assigns to them or they chose for the prestige instead of playing the one they would be great at doing!

originally posted by: dawnstar
or greater than or lesser than..
we have the ability to make such decisions but not the wisdom to make them wisely

That's a very good point. Let's explore!

originally posted by: dawnstar
we have millions of tiny bacteria in our digestive track and surely we feel we are greater than those tiny little creatures
that is of course till we do something stupid to wipe out all of those tiny friends of ours and end up having to deal with the consequences...

This also includes we do something stupid to over-stimulate the growth of those tiny friends of ours and end up having to deal with the consequences.

originally posted by: dawnstar
obviously the ceo feels he is greater than the workers under him and therefore feels entitles to all that money he earns but well if he were to ever lose those workers he would also lose his greatness.

Obviously the cashier feels she is the one who actually does the work, but if she earns more than she brings in, she loses her job.

originally posted by: dawnstar
and a good orchestra conductor can blend all of the different tones and notes from the many instruments that are at his command but can you take any one instrument out without the music ending up missing some of it's beauty? and if all the instrument players laid down those instruments and decided to be conductors would there be any music at all?

And if Tuba players feel there should be as many of them as violins, the music ends up missing some of its beauty. And if everyone switched to flute, the Devil wouldn't be able to go down to Georgia at all!

originally posted by: dawnstar
just because we lack the wisdom to see the equality doesn't mean it's not there it just means that the music we create isn't so beautiful has too many wannabe conductors and great musicians playing instruments that someone else assigns to them or they chose for the prestige instead of playing the one they would be great at doing!

If he can't get you to destroy yourself with pride from above, she'll get you to destroy yourself with kindness from below.

Working with the material you've provided, you must accept that our attempts at systemic as opposed to spontaneous kindness are liable to be applied just as unwisely. Perhaps this is why Dante left Human Reason in hell. The best place to be in hell, but still in hell.

Working with the material you've provided, of course.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

To treat others how they DON'T want to be treated is to suppress their equality

We dont suppress their equality, because I agree with LesMis about equality being a fleeting idea. We treat them as human beings, special, living conscious human beings. Any other way of looking at them ie as "equal" is to objectify and depersonalize them and then you may with a clear conscience say it is ok to kill them or send them off to war. I honestly think that we do humanity a disservice wen we hold Statute Law above Natural Law or natural justice natural rights.

(In your earlier post you said lack of striving to equality may lead to genocide and war)

LesMis said this in the OP

pertain not to any sort of reality, but to words someone once wrote down somewhere and made into law, with the notion of suiting the status quo, the many, the mores, and those who think they are free as long as they exist within these rules and regulations. We truly love this sort of irony.

"We are all equal therefore we must logically be free" See how that can be manipulated by the one writing the Law. All you have to do is look at the schooling system where innovation or brightness that goes against taxes the comfort of the teacher, or the lowest common denominator, the average will get you a trip to the Psychs and a handful of Ritalin.
To put it more clearly...all the children are special. They all deserve stars, we dont want to marginalize them. No one deserves to fail.
Now to go back to your exact words

To treat others how they DON'T want to be treated

I'm sorry, but if you're a bully sure we look at if you were bullied at home - and we help you; but at the same time we get an apology and restitution for the victim. We dont give platitudes to the victim and expect the victim to forgive the miscreant at right that instant as if to serve a lesson for the rest of the class, because in so doing we are punishing the victim by forcing an "ideal" response at our time and chosing, not when the victim is ready. You are a bully we make sure you know you ar a bully, "youre not special"

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I talk about things that money can't buy like love and empathy. If you love and empathize with someone then you are treating them as equal because you feel their pain or joy

In light of your response I apologize if my reply to you above is somewhat "harsh" I dont mean to attack just throwing some ideas out there. This is a minefield of a topic

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I claim it's an attempt to confine and limit what it means to be human according a definition, and enforcing that definition the moment an individual doesn't live up to it, or how I see it, proves the idea "human" to be wrong.

exactly S + F
Humanness=equality; by defining them as human we definitely limit them...it allows differing opinion in a different time to change the meaning of equality. This is why we call people not people or human but citizens. Like in ancient Rome their worth is not intrinsic in their humanness but as a "citizen" subject to the "State"

We now have affirmative action laws that put people in jobs based on colour not on merit.

a reply to: Unity_99

Equality is not about sameness, but everyones uniqueness.

We lose our uniqueness when as LesMis says some arbitary figure defines equality.
Uniqueness is an antonym of Equal. They cannot share the same idealized universe forced by "above"

a reply to: dominicus

"Let’s be realistic. Those who seek to put everyone on "different" grounds do so in their imagination."

Works both ways, so you can null and void either way in this argument, or just transcend both by agreeing all thought is illusion

Lets be realistic dominicus is equal to TheConstruKctionofLight; all thinking and the material world is an illusion. What a boring place ATS would be.

a reply to: daskakik

I could be wrong but the way I have always understood it is that "we are all equal before the law"

Ah...the Law...all hail the Law. Who wrote the Law? Your equals or some politician and /or the Judiciary to make you believe you are free? Why were menstruating women not allowed to swim? Why cant I eat pork? I know you're going to say doesnt apply as I'm quoting from some religious bible.

And if Tuba players feel there should be as many of them as violins, the music ends up missing some of its beauty. And if everyone switched to flute, the Devil wouldn't be able to go down to Georgia at all!

a reply to: LogicStool

kind of like some seem to think that we should all get a college education and MBA's? ya that got us far

as for your quote I notice that it's the tuba players who are deciding that others should also be tuba players so there will be more of them
that is kind of like you deciding your son should go to college and get an MBA when all your son wants is to work in a store because he likes the customer contact, sees himself as a really good cashier and has aspirations of someday opening his own chain or store. You might want him to get an MBA because you know he will be strapped for money as a cashier but that is because the employer doesn't see as much value in the cashier as the ceo of the company and pay the ceo a much larger portion of the profits. But I would suggest that this is faulty judgement really. A store doesn't really need a ceo does it?? I mean I know of a bunch of businesses that are basically run independently within a family (husband and wife teams with maybe one of their kids putting some time in. But one thing is sure they are gonna need someone to act as a cashier!! And to the customer many times interaction with the cashier plays an important role with the decision to come back to that store.
While I would bet very few people would even know who the ceo of the seven eleven companies are let alone have had any personal interactions with him or her!
Our judgements can often times be quite wrong as I believe history has proven over and over again. And I would suggest that maybe if we viewed others as more equal maybe that really great imaginary cashier son of yours would find his path to his aspirations a little less hard to travel.
There is nothing wrong with being a tuba player and in reality the contribution that they make to the music is just as important than any other of the musicians within the orchestra. Maybe it's better just to let each chose which instrument that they would want to learn to play without so much undue pressure to be something they don't want to be???

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

We are not equal is my argument. No one has the same opportunities; no one has the same rights; no one is treated with equal fairness, respect, consideration, regardless of what set of laws we use, no matter what moral authorities think they carry absolute morality, and regardless of what categories people see themselves as. Why is this? Because we are not equal.

Would it not be better to admit a truth, and go from there? Or is it better to hide behind a false notion?

This is what scares the people most, you have stated it very clearly. For them to question "equality imposed by 1 person by Statute" the real illusion tearing away would perhaps unhinge them. I think people need to read more about sociology and the dynamics of mores. I think those that fail to see it perhaps understand you at a gut level but are stuck with "its all we got and some improvement in the treatment of humans is better than nothing"

The danger they fail to see is that like any society in the past as long as you are winning its ok to have a "corrupted legal system" as long as the system works 90% of the time. They fail to see that equality did nothing but land them a big bill when bailing out the Bankers in the GFC. It was those same judges and politicians who shout out from on high about equality as they steal for their mates while the equal lose their homes or work 60 hours a week to make ends meet. But they fail to see the future debt imposed by the bail outs. The govts are bankrupt and the taxpayer is on the hook for the next 50 years.

Never mind as long as I got the next big idol program on TV or the latest Ipad who cares. We kick the can further down the road, why think when it opens your eyes and the light is too bright. We are equal except some.

Would it not be better to admit a truth, and go from there? Or is it better to hide behind a false notion?

!!!

I think it is possible that *we are all equal* in the sense that we are the result of conditions, and cause-and-effect.

So I am not sure if I should applaud say a well spoken, well educated man any more than say an ill behaved uneducated man, since it is possible the well spoken, well educated man came from an educated well spoken family, and the ill behaved from an ill behaved, uneducated family.

While this may not always be the case, it may still be the case that the result of what we have come to be is a matter of circumstances that have presented themselves, and the cause and effect from those conditions.

So considering this, maybe we can find some sort of respect and consideration/compassion for all people.

a reply to: HeyAmigo

we are not equal but does the stork tell the caterpillar we are not equal no it doesnt because were are so similar you must say that we are not equal

Does the lion tell the Gazelle they are both equal as it takes it life? The Lion doesn't need affirmative action law to eat the gazelle. People would write affirmative action laws to protect the gazelle, never mind the consequences of upsetting the balance.

a reply to: nOraKat

So considering this, maybe we can find some sort of respect and consideration/compassion for all people.

True but

So I am not sure if I should applaud say a well spoken, well educated man any more than say an ill behaved uneducated man, since it is possible the well spoken, well educated man came from an educated well spoken family, and the ill behaved from an ill behaved, uneducated family.

And if the educated man decide to drop out and beg in the street to find "enlightment" whilst the uneducated man started burning books in that street what would your judgement/applause be? Would you stop and ask them about what got them there?

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Does the gazelle label the lion as "bad" because it wants to eat him or is it mostly instictive nature taking hold and telling it to run like heck?

our instictive nature has been corrupted by reason and society and well to us is the gazelle considered weak because it has a predator hunting him or do we consider the lion as bad because he hunts?

nature would require a mother to do everything in her power to protect and provide for her young but for the human women society kind of corrupted that and for a long time limited her abilities to both...
I don't really think that nature is the best example to use when it comes to society. We have had centuries of conditioning to weaken those impulses.