SaraM wrote:
Thst isn't moral relativism at all. Washington's actions were fully consistent with the white suprematist view of race prevalent at the time, so it isn't even moral hypocrisy.
Moral relativism is simply the understanding that moral values will be understood differently in different cultures, and at different points in history. This is manifestly the case; look at the different value placed on life in different cultures, for example.
You are using the term to imply some kind of moral weakness, which isn't its meaning at all.
No what I am saying simply is that the values of a certain period of history when viewed through the morals of the present culture are percieved to be wrong. I would say that slavery is wrong regardless of when it existed in history... and that is an absolute... and you don't need to wear Male white supremacist glasses to see that.
rab_rant wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 7:15 pm
No what I am saying simply is that the values of a certain period of history when viewed through the morals of the present culture are percieved to be wrong. I would say that slavery is wrong regardless of when it existed in history... and that is an absolute... and you don't need to wear Male white supremacist glasses to see that.
True, but it doesn't really aid our understanding of the past to judge it by the standards of the present; not least because our present standards are still somewhat lacking.
Of course, if you are claiming absolutes or universals it is incumbent on you to demonstrate how you know, but that's a different fishy kettle.
weasel wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 6:25 pm
Interesting recently I wrote on this forum how teams in the bottom half of the table at the halfway point of the season did 23% better in the second half of the season, teams in the relegation places 34% better etc etc. I didn't give any evidence to support the stats I put up and yet everyone chose to believe it, not one person questioned it.
Just sort of shows how easy it is for something to be accepted as fact even if there is no supporting evidence.
Well that's because the person that would challenge it, me, can't be arsed because he's made it clear several times that most statistics are poorly correlated junk . I did consider challenging it but then didn't see the point.
"Never debate an idiot, they'll only drag you down to their level and they have the advantage of experience"
Richard wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 4:53 pm
The Punishment - Too much, John Terry got a 4 match ban and he was as guilty as hell.
Do I agree probability should be used over hard facts - Yes
Do I think Kiko is guilty - Probably
Harsh reality, if we go up he isn’t good enough for the PL. If we don’t go up he is too costly at £35k a week and no better than average for the Championship.
Leeds comes first, use this as an excuse to get rid of him but not until the ban is up just in case.
Going through your points:-
1. Agreed
2. WTF, you think probability should be used over hard facts????? absolutely no way
3. Disagree. I think he's been stitched up
4. Not really part of this discussion
I'm going back to 505, I saw them at Sheffield and they were amazing.
becchio bear wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 8:49 pm
Going through your points:-
1. Agreed
2. WTF, you think probability should be used over hard facts????? absolutely no way
3. Disagree. I think he's been stitched up
4. Not really part of this discussion
Wondered what you were going on about then saw my error, sorry it should have been the other way around, no to based on probable, I’ve edited it
I thought he’d been stitched up until I saw his defence and answers, I don’t think Casilla is racist, he just didn’t think and said it in the heat of the moment (in my opinion).
Point 4 is very relevant, if he was the best keeper in the division we’d not think twice about keeping him but he isn’t and he is costly. Bielsa is sticking by him, if the board doesn’t where will that sit with Bielsa? I don’t think we’ll see Kiko pull on a Leeds shirt again.
faaip wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 9:58 am
I always figure if you have to resort to insults you've lost ...but taunting isn't the best way to argue either
Quite right sir. This is essentially a convivial forum with many a thoughtful and insightful posting. Passion is one thing, but I really dislike insults of any kind. Unnecessary.
weasel wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 6:25 pm
Interesting recently I wrote on this forum how teams in the bottom half of the table at the halfway point of the season did 23% better in the second half of the season, teams in the relegation places 34% better etc etc. I didn't give any evidence to support the stats I put up and yet everyone chose to believe it, not one person questioned it.
Just sort of shows how easy it is for something to be accepted as fact even if there is no supporting evidence.
Actually PeterinBlackpool did challenge it, you never replied
weasel wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 6:25 pm
Interesting recently I wrote on this forum how teams in the bottom half of the table at the halfway point of the season did 23% better in the second half of the season, teams in the relegation places 34% better etc etc. I didn't give any evidence to support the stats I put up and yet everyone chose to believe it, not one person questioned it.
Just sort of shows how easy it is for something to be accepted as fact even if there is no supporting evidence.
Strange logic
Just because your stats werent challenged doesn’t mean you were believed.
Just saying.
' "Football is about the people and the players,” he said. “Then there are those who will mingle in the middle: the coaches, executives and journalists. That last group represents the worst part about football" Marcelo Bielsa
rab_rant wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 4:53 pm
It is the paradox of George Washington and slavery that the man who successfully fought a war in the name of liberty owned slaves his entire adult life.
Outrageous!!!! how could the American people let that man be president?
Ahhh the old moral relativism.
Sent from my SM-T515 using Tapatalk
The American people...
Just shy of 44000 people voted in the first Presidential Election.
Which was 11% or the electorate.
40% of the turnout voted for Washington.
Who needs any more proof?
Guilty
' "Football is about the people and the players,” he said. “Then there are those who will mingle in the middle: the coaches, executives and journalists. That last group represents the worst part about football" Marcelo Bielsa
weasel wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 6:25 pm
Interesting recently I wrote on this forum how teams in the bottom half of the table at the halfway point of the season did 23% better in the second half of the season, teams in the relegation places 34% better etc etc. I didn't give any evidence to support the stats I put up and yet everyone chose to believe it, not one person questioned it.
Just sort of shows how easy it is for something to be accepted as fact even if there is no supporting evidence.
Perhaps in all probability 43% of posters, just couldn't be arsed reading it.
rab_rant wrote: ↑Fri Mar 06, 2020 4:53 pm
It is the paradox of George Washington and slavery that the man who successfully fought a war in the name of liberty owned slaves his entire adult life.
Outrageous!!!! how could the American people let that man be president?
SaraM wrote:
True, but it doesn't really aid our understanding of the past to judge it by the standards of the present; not least because our present standards are still somewhat lacking.
Of course, if you are claiming absolutes or universals it is incumbent on you to demonstrate how you know, but that's a different fishy kettle.
It is very easy for folks to deal in absolutes... why you yourself only last night made the claim Forest are absolute cack.
rab_rant wrote: ↑Sat Mar 07, 2020 5:04 am
It is very easy for folks to deal in absolutes... why you yourself only last night made the claim Forest are absolute cack.
Absolute cack is a Platonic solid, a less than ideal form, currently manifesting in Nottingham.
Let us also involve its presence in Fulham and West Bromich.
