 Originally Posted by Skippy911sc
Even if your wife/girlfriends ass looks HUGE in those jeans it is unlikely you will tell her how big it looks. Would that be too PC or would you risk celibacy for the next month+ over a big ole ass? Some times a little kid does ask a STUPID question, do let him/her know how stupid it was? Do we treat some people a little different... I think so. And we probably should so they do not feel bad and wind up shooting the place up. You know that guy that works just down from you who plays a little too much WOW or COD, and has, you know, those crazy eyes? Do you tell him what a LOSER he really is? These things may all be truths but it does not mean we need to share everything that comes to mind with everyone. Do we need this many special groups...no, but do corporations need that many lobbyist? NO! We are the result of over protective parents an immense legal system and corporate giant greed.
Corporate giant greed? It's more like big government greed these days, I'd welcome a re-launching of big corporations personally, at least then people could get a job doing something as opposed to living off the ever expanding and growing gov't to take care of the whims of the people. Rather a corporate dominated society than a society dominated by the whims of a federal government with entirely too much power any day of the week. But that's the Ayn Randian ideology coming out within me there.
Then again, a lot of it goes back to the Kantian categorical imperative in whether a "lie" is ever valid in a situation or if someone should always tell the truth. Personally, I think caution should be used and intelligence employed at every opportunity. While granny's cookies may suck, you don't look at her after she's slaved over the oven all day and say: "Wow, grandma, these cookies are f***ing awful!!!". I've always preferred Hegel to Kant anyway, so it's a matter of preference.
As far as Mike mentioning "Truth" (with a capital T) v. "truth" (subjective or 'personal truth'), I happen to agree with him to an extent. I think the whole postmodern notion of "subjective truth" is absolute horseshit. Either something is or is not, at least on an most empirical bases. What about aesthetics, literature, or even faith though? What about the a priori questions? How do you empirically judge the Truth within these fields? What determining factor do we go by in stating "This is a GREAT work of art, literature, etc."? These are the realms of the subjective, something that exists a posteriori but can't be labeled as objectively "beautiful" or "horrible". In these areas, it's a matter of personal judgment and value. I think it's important to distinguish between Truth and personal preference, and to make sure we realize that personal preference is not "subjective truth" which is completely a postmodern fallacy (hell, postmodernism as a philosophy within itself is completely ridiculous).
Wow, went off on a bit of a tangent there...
Anyway, it's a matter of using good judgment skills. Sometimes it's better to not divulge a truth as a matter of the good but to use a scale for it. It's better not to tell granny that her cookies suck, to tell your wife that she looks fat as hell in that dress. Another example would be if an asteroid was days away from striking the earth and NASA couldn't do a damn thing to stop it. Would it be beneficial to tell people the truth or is it better to omit this from society? Sometimes the best practice, and go ahead and roll in your grave Kant, is to lie by omission as opposed to telling truth by commission. In theory the facts are always the best practice, but in practice, this isn't necessarily the right step to make.
j.p.
|
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks