Brigham Young:”When a master has a Negro and uses him well, he is much better off than if he was free.”

Florida State Board of Education: “slaves developed skills which, in some instances, could be applied for their personal benefit.”

Some people like to keep fooling themselves about that.

Equally appropriate would be the substitution of "need" in place of "like" in your observation.

Hence, fast and testimony meeting.

Evil tends to appear as an angel of light. Many of those who think they are being good, serve evil, by "keeping people safe" or obeying authority.

Curiously, almost exactly 24 hours ago another fly-by-night poster offered much the same ominous platitude.

"Some people will accept anything someone in a uniform or position of authority tells them."

https://www.exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,2486397,2486457#msg-2486457



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2023 04:25AM by Lot's Wife.

Hardly anyone believes they are evil. Many people do evil things. Therefore the only conclusion is that many such people do evil thinking they are doing good.

This was the case with Brigham Young's followers and the institution of slavery, both of which existed due to humans' herd insticts and obedience to authority. Slavery survived in Florida for so long because successive governments allowed it through unjust laws, and numerous people obeyed them because they had power. I'm not referring to the slaves themselves here by the way, but those who tolerated and allowed slavery to continue. The "free" people around them were as important in maintaining slavery.

Most of the time when someone kills another person, they do so on the orders of some hierarchy or organization. Millions die that way. Far fewer have ever died at the hands of a lone wolf killer. People prefer to kill as part of a gang or unit.

A congregation of hundreds of JWs will shun someone on the orders of their leaders, not on the word of one or two low grade munchkins. Put a uniform or lab coat on someone and more people will believe them. Sometimes like Brigham Young, they didn't even need much of a uniform, only power.

Say something once, why say it again?

"Liberty is meaningless where the right to utter one's thoughts and opinions has ceased to exist. That, of all rights, is the dread of tyrants. It is the right which they first of all strike down." — Frederick Douglass

There is always someone trying to do this, and they will deceive people into thinking that repressing that right is the correct thing to do in order to protect others etc.

I know, I know. Shed a tear for the poor right-wing victim, upon whom the sun does not shine.

Seriously, it's good that you lot are protecting us from AP Psychology courses; the misguided notion that slavery was "bad;" and all those evil teachers trying to turn wholesome boys and girls into unwholesome girls and boys by reading Shakespeare to them.

Without your protection, how could we possibly enjoy our many freedoms?

I know, right? Thank goodness that godly citizens have effectively banned classroom libraries, because we all know that promoting literacy is a dangerous thing. And if I had only known that putting up the "In God we trust" sign would have magically solved all of my students' behavior problems, my career would have been *so* much smoother.

OTOH, perhaps one of my former students listened to me when I said that if they mouth off to a police officer, assault a police officer, or refuse to follow a police officer's reasonable directions in the same manner that they treat me, they will not like the outcome. Maybe someone listened to that, and their adult life went just a little better as a result. But I would always add, "Some people can learn the easy way, and some need to learn the hard way, through experience."

summer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I know, right? Thank goodness that godly citizens
> have effectively banned classroom libraries,
> because we all know that promoting literacy is a
> dangerous thing.

I quoted Frederick Douglass, who was a BLACK man and an ABOLITIONIST, and supported the education of black people AFTER emancipation. Freedom and education are two things which are dwindling by the day. As is the free flow of information that Douglass supported. He was right about those particular matters.

Instead of acknowledging all that, we had a torrent of "othering" from Lot's Wife about "you lot" (whoever "my lot" are) and "right wing" (whatever that means these days, since the definition is constantly altered). It is clearly easier for Lot's Wife to think of people as mindless parts of blocs ("you lot's wife?"), as in Mormonism, rather than as people with their individual lives, rights and choices, who have the right to freedom from slavery and to determine their own futures.

Who "protects" her? She does. Not me, and certainly not those she wants to micromanage her life. If she wants to talk about the rest of us like NPCs, it may pay not to act like one. The only ones who can stand up for us are ourselves. You can't delegate that to other people as a small child does. If you do you'll end up with the wrong people in charge.

Did I say anything untrue? [checks notes.]

No, no I didn't.

ETA: You are trying to work both sides of an argument, and then acting all offended when Lottie and I take note of that. I'll give you points for cleverness, but it was not a successful attempt.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2023 01:52PM by summer.

> The only ones who can stand
> up for us are ourselves.

You may have misread or misjudged (or not even bothered to assess) the path this lovely exmo circus of thrilling acts and artists has taken...

In my mind, dealing with absolutes can be very difficult.  You've chosen a lonely road to travel.  Humans are herd animals, and to ignore that proclivity is fraught with peril.

I have nothing against your apparent need to stand on the city wall, a la Samuel the Lamanite, to call us to repentance, but the truth is, the book of mormon is entirely fiction.  Patience beats heroics, pretty much always has and probably always will, although this leaves me vulnerable to accusations of being overly simplistic.

It's unlikely you're going to make an impression here, at least not without investing a lot of time.  Chutzpah that rubs against the grain will not work here; you have to find the right angle in order to find a tolerance that will allow it.  That will take time and effort, something for which many "Online Influencers" do not have the patience.

I hope you'll continue to make the necessary investments, as I am easily amused, which is why Lot's Wife (AKA Gladys) dotes on me.

Jesus, the tamales are ready! I think I got them right this time.

Feigning insanity to fit in is a good survival strategy.

I prefer unprotected text.

This is what happens when you read at too young an age!!    
    

Be careful you don't catch a textually transmitted disease.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2023 07:17PM by Lot's Wife.

“Hardly anyone believes they are evil. Many people do evil things. Therefore the only conclusion is that many such people do evil thinking they are doing good.”

Too many people waste time on the unanswerable question: Why do bad things happen to good people? The more useful question is Why do good people do bad things?

mahu74 Wrote:
----------------------------
>
> Too many people waste time
> on the unanswerable question:
> Why do bad things happen to
> good people?  The more useful
> question is, "Why do good people
> do bad things?".

So are you saying that while the first question is unanswerable, the second one is?  

And more than likely, you are going to tell us that the answer you've come up to the second question is accurate, and we should take your word on it...  

Have you ever been wrong?  

And while I advocate that 'humanity' is a herd, the word, 'outlier,' has come into our vocabulary for a reason.  And I think there is evidence that outliers can't speak to, or for, the herd.

In my attempt to be epigrammatic, perhaps I oversimplified.

I have no satisfactory answer as to the cause and meaning of events beyond my control. My unoriginal conclusion is that “s——t happens”, but it’s not happening to me or anyone else. I have observed that bad things happen but I have stopped trying to assign cause or meaning.“Why do bad things happen to good people?” I don’t know. I find the question unanswerable and thus not useful.

I find the second question “Why do good people do bad things?” more useful because it’s a valuable tool for introspection. I believe myself to be a good person but I say and do things that I later regret. Introspection often provides me an answer as to why and a path to self improvement.

Thank you for accommodating us.

Regarding your second point, "Why do good people do bad things?" I have no objection to your premise that it serves as a tool for introspection.  But can we always be sure about the points of reference?

How do you know you/he/she are good people?  How can you always be sure that what you/he/she did is a bad thing?

...back to the first question, "Why do bad things happen to good people?" I stick with what I consider to be the simplest explanation: The Bell-Shaped Curve.  We point to this to support the view that "shit happens" for no other reason than that we can't prove that the paths of our lives are like pachinko balls.

I am not always sure about “the points of reference”.
My original post references slavery. Outward evidence suggests Thomas Jefferson held himself in high regard. As a child I was taught to revere him. He enslaved hundreds. By today’s standards he is guilty of kidnap, torture and rape. I sometimes ask myself what am I doing now that future generations will see as an obvious moral failing. I don’t know that I am a good person but it serves me to believe that I am. Since I can’t accurately predict the outcome of every action I can’t say for sure whether a thing I do is unequivocally bad. The best I can do is try to bring awareness to my intentions.

I like your bell curve explanation. Life is a crap shoot.
(Oops, I said crap)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2023 06:02PM by mahu74.

And thus the court jester's frivolity stimulates a very thoughtful and enlightening response. For which, thank you.

That, incidentally, is why we let him out of the dungeon for a couple hours a day.

Just curious what happens when you let him out on Groundhog Day

Well, last time we had to get a new groundhog.

> Outward evidence suggests
> Thomas Jefferson held
> himself in high regard.

When/where do we stop if we're going to *analyze* the status given to those who preceded us?  If someone disagrees with our judgment, who can be relied on to declare who is right?

Who, in our historical record, has maintained a pristine, unsullied reputation?

Remember when that "Just how evil is Mother Theresa?" hullabaloo was popular?

It kind of makes me sad to see that there are people who seem to live their lives based on getting "Likes" on Social Media.

Finally, there is more slavery extant now than at any time in known history...mostly because of the current huge population.  There may be a smaller percentage in terms of the numbers, but the total number of slaves is larger now than when Tommy Jefferson was busily rutting, or in other words, being human.

I wish I had some confidence, any confidence, that there was a way to behave that would *guarantee* that my kids, my grandkids, and my great-grandkids (sorry...have to brag!) will live in a better world.  But all the societal ills that I observed in my youth still exist. The books in which personality disorders are listed and explained keep adding pages as more maladies are diagnosed/discovered.

It isn't the purpose of this group to cure humanity's ills.  We're all only here to shop for insurance for when the Earth goes SPLAT! on the windshield of the Great Attractor.

“It isn't the purpose of this group to cure humanity's ills.”
You seem to be saying humanity has had, does have and likely will continue to have ills.
I concur. Condemning those who, in the past, exploited others changes nothing. I concur. “Analyzing those who proceeded us”in the sense of reporting a non-apologetic history is only important to those who believe humanity’s ills can be mitigated.
Growing up in the Jim Crow south where racism was woven into the entire fabric of society, I saw evidence that,as Martin Luther King said, “….the arc of the moral universe is long but it bends toward justice”.
For the sake of our grand kids (and your great-grandkids) I hope this is true.

> Growing up in the Jim Crow south where racism was
> woven into the entire fabric of society, I saw
> evidence that,as Martin Luther King said,
> “….the arc of the moral universe is long but
> it bends toward justice”.

While there is clear evidence that science and technology progress--we aren't communicating via smoke signals--I see precious little indication of sustained moral progress.

Could it be that human conditions oscillate both over time and over space? At any given point one part of the world is doing particularly well but other places are doing unusually badly. And if you look at the globe again a generation or two hence, the pattern has reversed.

The problem is of course that if technology progresses but human morality does not, what we end up with is the old foible-ridden hominins but armed with much bigger sticks and stones.

A ray of sunshine, I am, inexorably.

"The bloody rivers of war
are the streams on whose
banks human history is built."

                      --Judic West


I'm no expert, but I think the writer wants to get across the point that nothing that constitutes what it means to be human has ever come from peace on Earth or goodwill to men.

An argument could be made regarding the post-WWII Marshall Plan, but there is still plenty of fodder for arguing that Human Intelligence may not be what we'd like it to be.

Here I thought I was a cynic. Compared to you and L’s W, I’m Pollyanna on molly.
And of course I mean that in the nicest possible way.

I am practically Pollycynic!

If you ever need a nickel, I'll give you a dime.

And if you ever need $100, I'll give you a dime...  Yeah, me and the mormon church go way back!!

A word to the wise: don't take any wooden dimes.

I can’t take anymore of this nickel and diming. Good night.

Sleep well!

    

Great thread… Most entertaining and enlightening. Gotta take my pills and go to bed now. Yes, great thread.

Why not take your pills and stay up? That's what EOD does although I'm told he sometimes falls asleep.

When you “ take your pills and go to bed”…. You can either go to sleep or stay up; it depends on which pills you take. I’m sure EOD knows what he’s doing… no doubt he’s been there and done that.

I'm sure you are correct. But if we couldn't make up stories about our friends, what would we do?

...who or what defines evil and good.

The answer is that no one person defines either concept for everybody; some get it from their religions; some get it from studying history; and some just get it from their own heads. And, because there is no one source for defining good and evil, this means that some do what others consider to be evil because they think they are doing good.

Consider the question of slavery. The Bible certainly doesn't portray it as evil; in fact, some books in the Old Testament consider it as being both normal and necessary. Those who fought slavery and their succeeding generations of today view it as evil not because of the Bible but because of the ravages it left in the lives of both the slaves and their owners. But, if you only use the Christian Bible to determine whether slavery is evil, you could be forgiven for thinking that it was not.

I wrote about this a long time ago but I remember overhearing a blind school buddy talking to a priest when I was younger. The Jesuit priest gave some sage advice that I think applys to both this specific topic, and more generally, the topic of this thread.

What the priest said was that we must all both serve and be served. In other words, we must be willing to help others and then be willing to accept assistance when it is offered to us.

If all you do is serve other people (i.e. being a slave in all situations), then you eventually come to resent what the people you are serving have that you don't. By the same token, if all you do is receive service from others, then you begin to look down on those serving you and you start believing them to be less of a person than you are.

Okay. My sermon is over.

I find nothing strange in this persistence, but I’ve long rejected the pretending that Lucretius’s “Tantum religio potuit suadere malorum” is universal.

Reading Brigham Young, however, keeps me in check. Many a weary frontier Mormon practiced evil via the dictates of this singular man. Brigham Young was evil, more so than that libertine fillip that started the whole thing.

Yes, I agree. Both Brigham Young and Joseph Smith were evil men, but Brigham far more so than Joseph.

Like Human, I see nothing strange about the persistence of evil. I have a problem with the term evil because it drags in too much religious baggage that really isn't necessary. That said, I think 'evil' is a convenient shorthand for the really awful forms of bad behavior. And Dr Evil was the perfect nemesis for Austen Powers.

Perhaps I am a pollyanna too, but I find myself agreeing with Steven Pinker and Hans Rosling (book Factfulness and Youtube videos, if you aren't familiar) that statistically, the world has been progressing to better living conditions all over the world at rather dramatic speed. We tend to notice the bad more, perhaps a good survival skill, but much of the good is real quite good.

The Factfulness book is primarily about how to effectively show data through charts and graphs (as opposed to tables of numbers). It is interesting reading, even for those of you who hate math!

I looked up Hans' first TED talk. the data is kind of old (2006) and his accent requires you to pay attention (or at least it does me). There are other more recent videos. Explore.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVimVzgtD6w

Although I would love to join in the BY bashing, that's easy pickings. Debating that evil exists leads to a more interesting question: Why does evil exist?

Evil smashes calcified structures to enable new growth. Take patent trolls for example. There have been some spectacular industry shakedowns based on really lame patents. That is harder to pull off nowadays.

Supposing that Putin is evil for his invasion of Ukraine, whatever happens it's obvious a lot of geopolitical cruft has been cleaned out.

The Lahaina fire was bigtime evil. It was the biggest failure of municipal firefighting in the last century. One thing's for sure, it will never happen again. All of the safety holes will be plugged.

Evil in relationships is a huge motivator for growth if it happens to you. Good can come out of it, maybe a good that could only come about that way.

So whether evil is bad is a complicated question. Maybe we need evil. That's why 1% of us are psychopaths.

I remember years ago reading the book "Inside the third reich" by Albert Speer who was Hitler's chief architect and follower (the devil's architect) , and in this book Speer was asked how he could follow such an evil man, and he said "one seldom recognizes the devil when he puts his hand on your shoulder"

Running out of names for Rock Bands...

Outside of the human condition evil does not exist. Humans are the only animals that humiliate, kill, plot etc., just for fun or to prove how great they are. Humans are psychologically messed up due to the conflict between instinct and the human ability to self manage. This causes evil.

I object only to the bright line you draw between the animal world and humans.

All sorts of "tournament species," in which there is an alpha and a social hierarchy, involve humiliating and killing "to prove how great [the various animals] are" in order to maintain their social status. Meanwhile cats routinely "play" with their prey, torturing mice and sometimes birds for hours to kill the boredom. And chimps and other species engage in something very like genocide when they attack and destroy entire neighboring troops.

Humans differ only in degree from these examples. In fact, if it weren't for our massively overdeveloped brains I suspect we would be more or less typical primates. Where we differ is in the unique and extreme lengths to which we can go in our "evil" because of our "superior" mental abilities.

Black widow spiders eat their mates, and not in a good way.

Speaking of evil, nurse Lucy Letby was just sentenced.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/aug/20/lucy-letby-dozens-more-babies-police-believe-chester-liverpool

I should have clarified I mean humans are the only animal that is aware they are aware and can self adjust. All other animals follow instincts.

I would even quarrel with that.

> . . . humans are the only
> animal that is aware they are aware. . .

There is a lot of research on the question of what comprises self-awareness and it turns out that there is no bright line between species. I think ultimately all the differences are spectral.


---------------
> . . . and can self adjust.

I'm not convinced that that is true. How many times have we seen people continue doing things that are self-destructive even knowing what the consequences will be? There's a lot of science on that as well.


---------------
> All other animals follow instincts.

I'm the sort of misanthrope who thinks humans are at the very least 70% driven by instinct and impulse and at the very most 30% rational. Communally and individually, we insist on behaving the way our ancestors did tens and hundreds of thousands of years ago regardless of whether that makes sense.