Racism in Football

[db10_therza]

To say that racism cannot be based in logic is just wrong.. there can be a logical justification for racism like there could be a logical justification to believing in miracles.. It doesn't have to be illogical to be morally wrong however..

Please tell me more about logical justifications for racism… I’m thoroughly intrigued

 

[Lewdtenant]

Please tell me more about logical justifications for racism… I’m thoroughly intrigued

It's wild how easily you guys are triggered.. I don't care if u are being sarcastic, I will.. It's easy.. in the same way it's easy to come up with a logical justification for eugenics and that is partly why it's a big friggin problem.. Try to imagine for a second, that you are someone with the mental fortitude to be willing to entertain unpleasant notions... It's so weird because I am sure that even under your preferred political paradigm whatever it is, you yourself can come up with situations where racism would be somewhat logically justified, atleast to an extent.. just imagine being black in the Jim Crow south..

 

[Batman]

Yeah thanks.. I'd welcome you to articulate how it's racist.. But I suspect you'd sooner take your own advice

I don't have the necessary qualifications to explain things to people below a three digit IQ but I'll give it a shot. When you turn players getting "mocked" in a non racially motivated manner into the victims vs the players who are being ABUSED racially, you might be a bit racist yourself. When you come into a thread and the only contributions you make are to deny the obvious racist undertone of a statement as well as ascribe logic to racism, you yourself might be a bit racist and definitely low IQ. Nobody is triggered by your stupidity. I'm more offended by the waste of bandwidth.

 

[db10_therza]

It's wild how easily you guys are triggered.. I don't care if u are being sarcastic, I will.. It's easy.. in the same way it's easy to come up with a logical justification for eugenics and that is partly why it's a big friggin problem.. Try to imagine for a second, that you are someone with the mental fortutude to be willing to entertain unpleasant notions... It's so weird because I am sure that even under your preferred political paradigm whatever it is, you yourself can come up with situations where racism would be somewhat logically justified, atleast to an extent.. just imagine being black in the Jim Crow south..

It was a pretty simple question asking you to expand on a point you had just made pretty emphatically…

Seems like you’re the one that’s “triggered”?

 

[Lewdtenant]

It was a pretty simple question asking you to expand on a point you had just made pretty emphatically…

Seems like you’re the one that’s “triggered”?

This is called gaslighting !

 

[db10_therza]

I don't have the necessary qualifications to explain things to people below a three digit IQ but I'll give it a shot. When you turn players getting "mocked" in a non racially motivated manner into the victims vs the players who are being ABUSED racially, you might be a bit racist yourself. When you come into a thread and the only contributions you make are to deny the obvious racist undertone of a statement as well as ascribe logic to racism, you yourself might be a bit racist and definitely low IQ.

It’s not worth it he’s outed himself in the last post anyway. I was actually intrigued for a minute until I realised he’s one of those guys who actually just struggle with the semantics around the concept of racism because their “mental fortitude” doesn’t allow them to unpack anything beyond the most prima facie of takes on the subject without understanding anything of the context.

It’s a bit like saying a punch is a punch no matter what. Say that to someone who’s just copped one from prime Iron Mike vs McLovin.

It’s sad really but that’s the world we live in.

 

[Batman]

It’s not worth it he’s outed himself in the last post anyway. I was actually intrigued for a minute until I realised he’s one of those guys who actually just struggle with the semantics around the concept of racism because they’re “mental fortitude” doesn’t allow them to unpack anything beyond the most prima facie of takes on the subject without understanding anything of the context.

It’s a bit like saying a punch is a punch no matter what. Say that to someone who’s just copped one from prime Iron Mike vs McLovin.

It’s sad really but that’s the world we live in.

Yes, I've yet to meet an intelligent racist or apologist for it. Just tiresome having to listen to their nonsense and the immediate victim turn after you called him out.

 

[Lewdtenant]

I don't have the necessary qualifications to explain things to people below a three digit IQ but I'll give it a shot. When you turn players getting "mocked" in a non racially motivated manner into the victims vs the players who are being ABUSED racially, you might be a bit racist yourself. When you come into a thread and the only contributions you make are to deny the obvious racist undertone of a statement as well as ascribe logic to racism, you yourself might be a bit racist and definitely low IQ. Nobody is triggered by your stupidity. I'm more offended by the waste of bandwidth.

Wow, YOU are definitely, insanely tilted.

 

[db10_therza]

Yes, I've yet to meet an intelligent racist or apologist for it.

I have tbf. There’s quite a few in the hedge fund world. They are terrifying. Bear in mind that you can be incredibly intelligent in one way and thick as a brick in another.

There’s quite a few out there tbh. Robert Mercer of Renaissance Technologies is a great example. Same with Paul Marshall of Marshall Wace.

 

[Batman]

Wow, YOU are definitely, insanely tilted.

Sir you just cried that someone was gaslighting you. That's tilt. I have no clue who you are. You engaged with me, if you recall. Say dumb things, be called dumb. Very simple. My heart rate hasn't changed.

 

[Batman]

I have tbf. There’s quite a few in the hedge fund world. They are terrifying. Bear in mind that you can be incredibly intelligent in one way and thick as a brick in another.

There’s quite a few out there tbh. Robert Mercer of Renaissance Technologies is a great example. Same with Paul Marshall of Marshall Wace.

Oh yes, I'm familiar with Robert Mercer. Evil incarnate.

 

[Lewdtenant]

Congratulations guys

You found the racist

Simpletons

 

[Batman]

Congratulations guys

You found the racist

Simpletons

 

[Lewdtenant]

It’s not worth it he’s outed himself in the last post anyway. I was actually intrigued for a minute until I realised he’s one of those guys who actually just struggle with the semantics around the concept of racism because their “mental fortitude” doesn’t allow them to unpack anything beyond the most prima facie of takes on the subject without understanding anything of the context.

It’s a bit like saying a punch is a punch no matter what. Say that to someone who’s just copped one from prime Iron Mike vs McLovin.

It’s sad really but that’s the world we live in.

Pettiness aside.. Do you really believe racism cannot be justified logically ?
To me, logic is not some tool to arrive at pleasant or even correct answers, actually the answers produced by logic are often severely unwelcome or simply untrue.. Maybe we just have a different take on what logic means.. I take it to mean the use of reason to arrive at conclusions, my experience says that there can be reason behind madness of most kinds..

 

[Blood on the Tracks]

To say that racism cannot be based in logic is just wrong.. there can be a logical justification for racism like there could be a logical justification to believing in miracles.. It doesn't have to be illogical to be morally wrong however..

To judge an individual's worth or value on the basis of how much melanin they produce, for example, is inherently illogical, I struggle to see how that can be argued.

Everyone has reasons for their biases in life, good reasons, bad reasons, indifferent reasons. It doesn't always follow that the reasons given are logical.

 

[Lewdtenant]

To judge an individual's worth or value on the basis of how much melanin they produce, for example, is inherently illogical, I struggle to see how that can be argued.

Everyone has reasons for their biases in life, good reasons, bad reasons, indifferent reasons. It doesn't always follow that the reasons given are logical.

I can't say that I disagree with much of this.
I suppose my only contention is, again, that logic can be used to arrive at illogical positions. for instance, I don't believe in god, but I believe that there are in fact logical justifications for belief in god. Of course I also believe, that there are logical justifications for not having a belief in god..

 

[Tom Mix]

I can't say that I disagree with much of this.
I suppose my only contention is, again, that logic can be used to arrive at illogical positions. for instance, I don't believe in god, but I believe that there are in fact logical justifications for belief in god. Of course I also believe, that there are logical justifications for not having a belief in god..

I think you need to distinguish between objective and subjective logic. A crackpot who believes he is Napoleon will logically decide he needs to dress like him but there is no actual logic involved because he clearly is not Napoleon.

 

[db10_therza]

Pettiness aside.. Do you really believe racism cannot be justified logically ?
To me, logic is not some tool to arrive at pleasant or even correct answers, actually the answers produced by logic are often severely unwelcome or simply untrue.. Maybe we just have a different take on what logic means.. I take it to mean the use of reason to arrive at conclusions, my experience says that there can be reason behind madness of most kinds..

The use of logic is just like the use of any mathematical algorithm- it suffers from “garbage in - garbage out”. Most logical fallacies are actually a result of ill conditioned or more commonly just incomplete premises. People don’t pay enough attention to definitions and initial conditions / assumptions. It’s why I brought up the point of semantics.

This is how charlatans like Jordan Peterson can seduce crowds of people into arriving at faulty conclusions - he literally starts off half his BS with “define xyz”… the reality is most people go through life without thinking about the definitions of otherwise important things so they can be manipulated in this way.

At a higher level in some ways I agree that logic can arrive at illogical outcomes. In fact that statement is logical in its own way. Logic is simply a tool or a framework. If your starting point is absolute truth, then logic should always hold, but there are vanishingly few absolute truths which goes back to @MartiSaka ’s point about subjective and objective logic. As a wise man once said, Descartes didn’t die for this…

 

[jones]

The use of logic is just like the use of any mathematical algorithm- it suffers from “garbage in - garbage out”. Most logical fallacies are actually a result of ill conditioned or more commonly just incomplete premises. People don’t pay enough attention to definitions and initial conditions / assumptions. It’s why I brought up the point of semantics.

This is how charlatans like Jordan Peterson can seduce crowds of people into arriving at faulty conclusions - he literally starts off half his BS with “define xyz”… the reality is most people go through life without thinking about the definitions of otherwise important things so they can be manipulated in this way.

At a higher level in some ways I agree that logic can arrive at illogical outcomes. In fact that statement is logical in its own way. Logic is simply a tool or a framework. If your starting point is absolute truth, then logic should always hold, but there are vanishingly few absolute truths which goes back to @MartiSaka ’s point about subjective and objective logic. As a wise man once said, Descartes didn’t die for this…

Good post and great demonstration of faulty logic quoting the wrong poster at the end.

 

[Lewdtenant]

The use of logic is just like the use of any mathematical algorithm- it suffers from “garbage in - garbage out”. Most logical fallacies are actually a result of ill conditioned or more commonly just incomplete premises. People don’t pay enough attention to definitions and initial conditions / assumptions. It’s why I brought up the point of semantics.

This is how charlatans like Jordan Peterson can seduce crowds of people into arriving at faulty conclusions - he literally starts off half his BS with “define xyz”… the reality is most people go through life without thinking about the definitions of otherwise important things so they can be manipulated in this way.

At a higher level in some ways I agree that logic can arrive at illogical outcomes. In fact that statement is logical in its own way. Logic is simply a tool or a framework. If your starting point is absolute truth, then logic should always hold, but there are vanishingly few absolute truths which goes back to @MartiSaka ’s point about subjective and objective logic. As a wise man once said, Descartes didn’t die for this…

Of course those people under the spell of JBP would say that it's other people who don't hold to a firm definition of terms like racism. Semantics are definitely part of the discussion, but that's the rule rather than the exception in my opinion.

It's usually quite easy to critique the logic of a certain paradigm when looking at it from the outside. You can scrutinize the internal workings of most things by ramming them against other ways of thinking.. hell, logic itself can be difficult to justify when looking at it from certain philosophical viewpoints as you pointed out, especially if we bring 'objective' or 'absolute truth' into the mix.. When ancient civilizations performed ghastly rituals to appease some god, or in medieval Europe when they burned witches, there WAS a certain logic behind it when viewed from within the their worldview. it's not so cut in dry is all's I am saying.