1 Too deep for me on a Playoff Sunday.

2 I'm with toby928.

Besides, who has the standing to dictate morality these days? Osama Obama? Bill O'Reilly? Pissy Chrissy Matthews? Glenn "the Weeper" Beck?

Chesterton's thesis can be reduced to one word: fuggeddaboutit.

3 Once you detach 'right' and 'wrong' from traditional Judeo-Christian ethics, anyone can declare anything to be either right or wrong--and which is which will  shift with the tides of popular sentiment and taste.

If you add the coercive ( and taxing ) powers of government to the Various Nit-wits deciding what is now right and now wrong, you get.......Big Trouble

( aka Michelle Ma Belle )

4 Sauce for the judiciary committees.  Like yesterday's post.

5 I do love me some Chesterton on a Sunday afternoon.  Loads of his stuff free or for cheap on the Kindle, and so much of it is always relevant.

C. S. Lewis is an easier read, but Chesterton doesn't pull any punches.

6 I'm not scoffing at the thread.  I'm just drinking.  There are a lot of smart morons here, a series of posts on that old tory Johnson, and Lewis, and other giants would be educational.

7 Hey, rdbrewer is new at cob logging. Give him a chance.

Wait, this is AoS, sorry, I forgot. Savage him!

Love the sidebar fuel, rdb, seriously, but this *might* have done with a *dash* more discussion before opening the panel to questions and comments from Statler and Waldorf in the peanut gallery.

Nobody seems to know where to go with it.

8 Notice the ones who scoff universal standards of right and wrong are often the quickest to call someone "evil."

9 I know it's silly to think anyone on a judiciary committee might read these things, but if some Republican staffer stumbles across one of these posts, it might help.  I put these up because of some of Obama's so-enlightened-they're-really-kind-of-dumb nominees. "Oh, we'll just slap some modern understanding on it." We're a nation of laws, not men.

10 Chesterton's thesis can be reduced to one word: fuggeddaboutit.

I don't think that's what he's saying.  I think he's saying that Americans, especially American social reformers, confuse "sin" with "stuff I don't like or can't see the point of."  And then they campaign about it and then they legislate against it.  (Chesterton later in the essay mentions Prohibition.)

Thus, watching the wrong television channel is a sin.  Buying the wrong kind of lightbulbs is a sin.  Eating the wrong kinds of food is a sin.  Wanting to own a gun is a sin.  Thinking the wrong things are sinful is a sin.  Real sins, on the other hand aren't sins.

Chesterton is saying that vices are real, sin is real, but that you absolutely can't fuggeddaboutit; you have to know what they really are.  And Americans just don't think.

11
Too heady.

12 Right and Wrong both seem abstract these days.

13
Evocative.

14

Love Chesterton. The "elite" won't read him or those like him because "it's old" and he's "religious". The rest can't read him.

This piece shows you the difference between "environmentalism" and totalitarianism. My using plastic bags at the grocery, although horrific to the tribe, is not immoral. Having babyless fathers to take money from the state is immoral and terribly so but the tribe has moved to protect that immorality in bureaucracy and reward it in solvency. The definition of mortal sin combines a knowing of the act, the seriousness of the act, and the damage of the act. So many of the tribe's naming of sin is lost in the seriousness of it. In their effort to make is serious they have manufactured their global doom--something so serious that no single or even multiple acts could cause it--thus making us all sinners and themselves the absolvers, if only we would enslave ourselves to it.

15 Anthropology is Science!

16
Cerebral, even.

17 My brother in law is working in Brunai. He cannot wear yellow because it is the "sultan's color". If you wear it, you're in big trouble. I see little difference in that than the elite here dictating that I have to drive a smaller more unsafe care because they are afraid of the boogie-man. Americans try to legislate morality but they don't know what morality is.

18

Interesting...good post.

19 Yesterday, that little tool JEA wanted to know who was "in charge" of morality? Just asking the question shows you his tribal values.

20
Who knew Jay Cutlet would be John Elway today?

21 It's all relative, man....

22 I guess you believe it should be you, dagny. Forgive my questioning you godlike powers, and please don't strike me with lightning.

23 WTF, rd, you gonna post this during a playoff game?  Surrender your mancard.  Now.

24 I guess you believe it should be you, dagny.

The point is, everyone believes it should be them, JEA.  That why our system was set up to avoid empowering the anointed to decide for you.  Persuasion is the key.  Convince enough of your fellow citizens and you win.

25 3

Assuming traditional Judeo-Christian ethics are not also part of the shifting tides of popular sentiment, sure. But to assume that you would need to be a Christian or a Jew, and most of the world is neither.

26 Posted by: VKI at January 16, 2011 03:52 PM (LZK9H)

Yes, but explaining it to people who live in that space is nigh impossible. It's a very self-reinforcing space that does not encourage actual questions about itself.

27 I'll put up an open thread later if y'all want one.

28 22 I guess you believe it should be you, dagny.

Forgive my questioning you godlike powers, and please don't strike me with lightning.

Posted by: JEA at January 16, 2011 04:14 PM (J73wL)

Dude, you just got FIVE gold stars in "Missing the Point Completely."

Did you take classes in that or were you just gifted in some way?

29 Having babyless fathers to take money from the state is immoral...

Don't you, like totally, mean fatherless babies?

30 Thanks, rd. I hadn't read this one before.

I love Chesterton but reading him requires work and thought. In the age of twitter, there aren't enough of us willing to work at reading.

31 Seattle Slough and I had a long argument one night because he was trying to rule out religious based policy arguments a priori.  He didn't accept them and thought that it was Un-American to advance them since metaphysics is not something we all agree on, and debate should, in his view, be limited to those things we can all agree on. 

I called him a provincial school master.

32 23 WTF, rd, you gonna post this during a playoff game? Surrender your mancard. Now.

Posted by: Peaches at January 16, 2011 04:17 PM (zxpIo)

See, this is how it happens. They start pushing for a space of their own in your space, then they try to push you out.

I refuse to submit to the bizarre contention that my mancard is threatened by the fact that I don't care to watch a bunch of fit, sweaty young men exercising.

I would rather watch fit, sweaty young women exercising. If they had games where the cheerleaders actually played, I'd watch those.

Or just two hours of cheerleading. I'd watch that, too.

33


JEA can go horsefuck.

34

I would rather watch fit, sweaty young women exercising.

Three words: adult. gymnastics. class.

35
that playoff thread below is getting too long

36
I'm squatting in this one.

37 I used to belong to a health club where the men's hot tub faced the aerobics floor through a glass wall.  It was hard to find a space in there to soak during the secretaries' lunch hours.

38

It was hard to find a CLEAN space in there to soak during the secretaries' lunch hours.

FIFY

39 Is this the recipe thread?

40

 Is this the recipe thread?

That depends.  Are you interested in learning how to make a sweaty secretary sandwich?

41

See, this is how it happens. They start pushing for a space of their own in your space, then they try to push you out.

Agreed.

42
you know the 'clam' machines (the ones women use to exercise their clams?) at the gym?

After over a decade, gyms finally got the idea to face them against the wall.

43 Stoopid sock

44

I would rather watch fit, sweaty young women exercising.

Three words: adult. gymnastics. class.

Posted by: Alex at January 16, 2011 04:26 PM (yO2tH)

Yeah, but it's Sunday.

*ahem* Topic token: How does the openness of discussion of desire relate to temporary vs. permanent morality? Is it actually corrosive of real benefits to monogamy, or is it a healthy reinforcement of healthy natural drives, which are healthy?

Or, alternatively, if you don't want to talk, you could search You-Tube for "aerobics."

45 Fun footnote: Women's smoking was a public relations coup for the tobacco industry and the man who invented the term "public relations," Edward Bernays: http://bit.ly/dZ8Mes

46

That depends. Are you interested in learning how to make a sweaty secretary sandwich?

Posted by: Alex at January 16, 2011 04:32 PM (yO2tH)

Bow chicka bow wow.

47

I'll put up an open thread later if y'all want one.

We never turn down the offer o an open thread.

48
cancer is a fun footnote?!!?!??

Why do I suspect that Sissy Willis is an anti-smoking Nazi spammer?

49
Hi, I'm Sissy.

/voice changes to deep satanic voice

Big Tobacco kills.

50
I hope brewski is happy.

His post now has 50 comments.

51 On the tobacco note: I saw a can of dip today that had the warning "This product is addictive".  I think that the tobacco companies should all modify those warnings to read "This rich, full flavored tobacco product is addictive". 

52 Glad to see JEA arrived to prove my point. Thanks, tool.

53

The Tea Party should hold a barbeque and cigar smoke-a-thon outside the White House this summer. 

54 Hey, GOPSoothsayerproudbootylover, Sissy Willis is MOI, a card-carrying Tea Partier from way back! Just ask Glenn: http://bit.ly/8C1CoM 'Heard about the Bernays story from Da Man himself, Glenn Beck. Geez.

55 I'll recycle yesterday's booze thread.  It got stomped on.

56

I was about to complain about the threadjack, but then I realized--

at least this place isn't ALL Too-sahn ALL the time anymore

57 GOPSoothsayerproudbootylover: I LOVE the Bernays angle in context: Trendy amoral types were unwitting pawns in a filthy capitalist scheme to make MONEY!

58
My apologies, Sissy.

It's just that you popped out of nowhere.

59 Smoking doesn't make you immoral. Stinky and short-lived, but not immoral.

60

The whole Too-San nonsense directly correlates to Chesterton's point.

 

Murder is immoral to God and Man.  Thou shalt not kill (commit murder). But how responsible is a paranoid schizophrenic?  Is he really aware of "right and wrong"?  If you attribute the quality of judgement of right and wrong to him, then he can't have been influenced by "outside" influences, i.e. the politcal rhetoric that is so harmful (allegedly).

If he was schizo-nuts, then again, outside influences were not the cause of his rampage.  Therefore, all the self-righteous talk about the tone of political discourse is, of course, some tribal rain dance to get people to shut up that don't agree with the loud mouth wisdom the is spewed about politics by the empty headed motor mouths that blather on TV or right in the New York Times.It's not about morality, it's about the Chattering Tribe trying to shut up the Dissenting Tribe.

Tribal, it is.

61 Smoking doesn't make you immoral. Stinky and short-lived, but not immoral.

Neither does weed.  It just makes you lazy and content.  Soma, for a new generation.

62

 

63 Dude's grammar sucks.

64

'Redrum' is moral if you espouse A Certain Theo-Political Belief Which Shall Never Be Named In Relation To Any Act Of Violence, isn't it? 

65 'Redrum' is moral

That's a definitional problem.

66 Nevermind 64.  I denounce myself.

67 I still like eating paste and ain't going to stop no what you say.

68 The thing about Chesterton that drives fundamentalists of (and they may be surprised to learn it, but modern liberals are fundamentalists of the worst kind) nuts is that he understood that mere actions were, in and of themselves, not necessarily moral or immoral. It was the action in the context of the maxim behind it that was moral or immoral.

69 Too many people are control freaks. They scream day and night they are not, but a even child can see they are. Control freaks use whatever tools are at hand to impose their views. Fear, intimidation, laws, religion, force of arms, withholding favors; anything that works and they can get away with.

70 69 Too many people are control freaks.

Posted by: eman at January 16, 2011 05:43 PM (0aJSF)

Even worse, the usual alternative is "live and let live," so very few actually challenge the control freaks - the freaks end up in positions of authority over others because the "let livers" don't.

Kind of a core message form the last week.

71 Took me a long time to get used to G.K.'s writing style. Once I did I learned to really appreciate the precepts he builds a defense with. Although I do not hold to Catholic orthodoxy I find him to be the best spokesman for it. Eman, I would suppose that every man in prison would agree with your statement.

72 Control freaks use whatever tools are at hand to impose their views. Fear, intimidation, laws, religion, force of arms, withholding favors; anything that works and they can get away with.

I'd say that was the human condition.  We like what we like and want to see it generalized.  It's the compact and other's human natures, that limit what we can get away with.  We're all moral busybodies in our own way.

73

Throughout history, the winners of conflicts have been the moral ones, ergo, the losers are the immoral ones. You can't really say that God favors the moral ones, though, because if its true that men are made in God's image, one must conclude that God fucks up a lot, too. Besides, He's been around for so long that one must assume that He has become senile and feeble-minded, also; hence, i.e., his creation of liberal Democrats about a hundred years ago, leaving out parts of their brains. By accident? Maybe. But then, maybe He has developed a childishly impish sense of humor, too, as the elderly sometimes do.

I prefer to suspect that the Greeks and the Romans had it right, and that there are several Gods dispersed around the planet, changing places with each other regularly to relieve their boredom. Some days you get a kind one, some days you get a prick. Jesus was too strange to be the son of God. He was probably just a street hustler, the Al Sharpton of the ancient world. Just a thought.

74 Posted by: Brian at January 16, 2011 06:05 PM (sYrWB) As boring as it may be I think the whole "Free Will" thing explains all of the "failings" that you ascribe to the Almighty.

75 Nice Brian. I hope that was cathartic for you. Like all moral relativist you suppose to rise above the morality merchants and then feel the need to be condescending and rude to buttress your argument?

76

Aw gee, #75, with your usual senseless come-backs, now you've gone and hurt my feelings.

77 I consider the question of Origins the ultimate proof of God. What is the ultimate origin of the Cosmos? Why is there a Cosmos? Is there such a thing as abstract Good, and Evil for that matter? Without God in the picture, I think not. Good and Evil merely come from our minds, and once we are gone all the evil done matters not. In other words, without God, there is no rational choice but Nihilism. The Niceen Creed, therefore, is not just a formulaic statement of doctrine. It is a positive affirmation of faith. Faith that life matters and that our actions of eternal consequences. Faith in God is Faith in Hope. No one can force himself to "believe" in anything. I struggle to reconcile reason with belief in God, to interpret the Bible rationally. But we can certainly choose Hope over Despair. And I say, ultimately God is our only true Hope. That said, are there any tits on this thread?

78 rdbrewer

good stuff.

79 Chesterton discusses "righteousness" as pertaining to the American lady for example, what habits or mannerisms "show" virtue.

The facade of self righteousness based upon a tribally induced dogma or aesthetic custom is the outward symbol of acceptability within that tribe. The old fashioned American do and don't list required of "a lady", whether it's never smoking, the places a lady goes or never goes, and certainly the lady's wardrobe modesty has a counterpart in Sharia Law. When the mask [jihab] is worn outside of tribal context, the shame of rejection from the "other" outside world of people induces knee-jerk response from everyone. The sophisticates leer and ridicule. The objective observe to draw an analysis, or look away with indifference. And the subject flaunting the facade either retreats to find comfort within [her] tribe, stands ground obstinately demanding that those outside of the tribe must accommodate her dogmatic customs [on pain of death]. Perhaps the subject finds some logical way to "go figure" whether the dogma is still acceptable to herself, or if she's ready to let the jihab go when not in Islam. But that is rarely a "choice" even in America, given the Muslim family practice of "honor" killing.

Were this patriarchal tribal dogmatic facade of impersonating morality identified within the American religious community, there is an exemplary sect gone global which socially dictates to avoid the appearance of evil as of paramount importance -- missing the mark to avoid being, thinking, wishing or doing evil.

 

80 74 Great come back. 

81

Aw gee, #75, with your usual senseless come-backs, now you've gone and hurt my feelings.

Posted by: Brian at January 16, 2011 06:27 PM (sYrWB)

There are two kinds of people in this world.

People who come up with lame revisionist cosmologies based explicitly on what they "prefer to suspect," and people who get to call other people senseless.

The "comparing Jesus to Al Sharpton" part was just your desperate cry for attention. Why don't you just tell your Daddy he never loved you enough, instead of coming here to tell us?

82 "Oh, we'll just slap some modern understanding on it." We're a nation of laws, not men. Posted by: rdbrewer

Chesterton's German contemporaries in neurology were metaphysically analyzing how one understands (verstehen to understand, one must analyze all perspectives -- feelings, thoughts, experience, evidence) and analyzing how an idea actually becomes useful knowledge.

If people don't study history, they won't even be smart enough to repeat its accomplishments, preferring to authentically "re-invent".

83

If people don't study history, they won't even be smart enough to repeat its accomplishments, preferring to authentically "re-invent".

Heh.  True.  One of Obama's nominees treated his philosophy (of applying contemporary understanding) as if he had just come up with it.  So not only did he want to re-invent on an ad-hoc basis, he re-invented the philosphy of re-inventing.  Put his stamp on it. 

84 Spam isn't immoral. It's just annoying as hell or Hell.

85 he re-invented the philosphy of re-inventing.

And probably expects us to think it was an original idea. Sadly, too many will.

86 I remember seeing him on TV and hearing either him or the reporter and thinking, "He thinks he just came up with that."  I believe it was professor Goodwin Liu.

87

Got it!

As a nominee to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the 39-year-old Berkeley law school professor is a prototype for those who believe the Constitution should be read to reflect what he has called the "evolving norms and social understandings of our country."

(Emphasis mine.)  What an arrogant bastard.

I could go on a rant here, but "norms"?  "Understandings"?  Where, on the coasts?  How stupid.  And I guarantee you he has no idea.  "Well, I'll just look around and divine the social understandings." 

That brand of stupid really frustrates me.

88

I'm busy today.  Gotta go out and divine the social understandings and stuff.  You know, the norms.  Gotta look into the norms. 

I'll start in Berkeley.

89

I shall deviate from the norms--to first principles.

G.K. rocks.

90 Wait, this is AoS, sorry, I forgot. Savage him!

You don't understand. See, this post is like the genuinely good stories that Hef used to put in Playboy in order to provide ethical cover for the boobies.

91 By the way, thanks for this, rdbrewer. You've piqued my interest in Chesterton.

I hope you make "think-pieces" such as this a regular feature here at the HQ.

92 81  Posted by: Merovign, Bond Villain at January 16, 2011 07:37 PM (bxiXv)   Merovign is to philosophy and psychology what Julia child was to a chicken.    Get bent, you old blowhard. Your blathering is stale. You're too obtuse, too shallow, too clueless, too ditzy and too dense to even think rationally, much less in the abstract.

93 Betcha when grumpy, old Merovign reads #94, he says, "Duh" and then "Huh?"

94 You guys ever write something that seemed perfectly clear when you put it down, and then when you went back you couldn't figure out why the f*** you wrote it that way?  I did that.  Edited my final paragraph for clarity.

95 BTW, thanks for the nice words, guys.

96 The guy looks like Rob Reiner.  I don't know if thats bad, but it's not good.

97 The world needs more GKC. May I suggest "Eugenics and other Evils". Particularly the chapter on Socialism. The text is free on the internet.