|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 2:43 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
I think this describes Hefner's recent bevy of blond beauties at his Playboy mansion rather nicely, don't you think.
|
Actually, no. I think it demonstrates you have a shallow idea of slavery and undercuts your later comment:
| Quote: |
| But there is no way to rationalize our way out of slavery--it was immoral. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kikomom
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Location: them thar hills--Penna, USA--Zippy is my kid, the teacher in ROK. You can call me Kiko
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I like this bit...
| Quote: |
| In "The Naked Communist," Skousen had argued that the communists wanted power for their own reasons. In "The Naked Capitalist," Skousen argued that those reasons were really the reasons of the dynastic rich, who used front groups to do their dirty work and hide their tracks. |
Who does Beck&Co. think they are in that grand scheme of things?
Meanwhile, back on the Texas textbook front, nevermind the Mormons...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koveras
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Koveras wrote: |
| Precisely why I called it nebulous. Similarly one could point to slaves unhappy 'despite slavery,' or in other words who were by constitution dissatisfied. If they're anything like people today, that'd probably be a large proportion. |
Well, it is nebulous insofar as it would be very hard to quantify, but if we're being totally realistic, do you think that being actively enslaved would overall tend to make someone more or less happy? Personally, I feel like slavery in and of itself would more often make someone less happy than more happy, but I'm judging that based on how I'd feel admittedly.
| Koveras wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Koveras wrote: |
| 2) If the justification is based on feelings, there's nothing absolutely immoral about slavery, and it becomes an calculation between specific masters and slaves. Perhaps you agree with that, after all. |
A Utilitarian would probably agree with you, and simply argue that slavery is de facto immoral because systematic slavery will almost invariably decrease overall happiness. |
I would challenge that utilitarian to prove it. But my truck isn't really with that utilitarian, who is at least consistent, but with those who would claim slavery is absolutely wrong while basing this axiom on feelings.
In other words I'm not pro-slavery, but I am interested in good arguments for or against. |
I understand that. I really do think it's true that being enslaved against your will would generally make you less happy -- especially if you realized you were enslaved, as opposed to say some sort of Matrix style world where you didn't realize it -- but I can't prove that's universally true for everyone, just for myself. |
I'm not sure if that's true. By no means do I know much about slavery. But TE Lawrence reported that in Saudi Arabia thousands of black slaves were kept, few of whom made any attempt to escape, despite being unguarded and unsupervised. To compound this, apparently some of them told him they were happy. He mentions Arab religious and social mores which deprecate cruel treatment of slaves. Most of the slaves were eventually freed, and not only 'set loose,' but 'set up' with property and wives.
Pre-modern slavery is probably misunderstood by most people these days, who do not factor in the change from a household and craft/guild-based economy to an industrial system. Without a doubt slavery, like most other things, becomes inhumane when it is industrialized.
This is beside the point. I return to my first stance. Slavery is, as an institution, a matter for impersonal laws of justice and economics to decide. Not feelings. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 10:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| few of whom made any attempt to escape, despite being unguarded and unsupervised |
I see you are not keeping up with your Stockholm Syndrome reading.
Besides, Saudi slavery was a different breed of slavery--there are various forms of it, as I'm sure you know, some even worse than others.
Wow. A total stranger comes to town for a couple of days, has no power whatsoever to affect the social system you are trapped in, and it's a surprise the slave doesn't pour out his heart...Amazing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
itaewonguy
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
the African slaves had it bad.. but many other nations before them were also enslaved and had it even worse!
slavery was part of history pretty much any nobleman or who could afford one had one or more.. , but there were laws in place back in roman times to protect them... not sure else where through history....
I do believe most slaves where born into slavery werent they? back like BC times.. I dont really know..
Slavery would of sucked big time! no question about it..
just the whole idea of it makes no sense, how humans could treat other humans in that way... but I guess they considered them not even human!
unbelievable! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koveras
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 5:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| few of whom made any attempt to escape, despite being unguarded and unsupervised |
I see you are not keeping up with your Stockholm Syndrome reading. |
From his description, I think it just as likely that they were acting in self-interest. As slaves their lives were better, even more 'upwardly mobile,' than what their dirt-poor fathers who sold them to begin with could have given them.
Is this 'syndrome' the blanket explanation for contented slaves? Why did some slaves develop syndromes while others didn't?
| Quote: |
| Besides, Saudi slavery was a different breed of slavery--there are various forms of it, as I'm sure you know, some even worse than others. |
Well I know about harems and eunuchs and such from Montesquieu, but not much else. I don't think any of that was exclusive to Arabia, so you must mean something else. I find that sort of thing disgusting, the eunuchs especially.
| Quote: |
| Wow. A total stranger comes to town for a couple of days, has no power whatsoever to affect the social system you are trapped in, and it's a surprise the slave doesn't pour out his heart...Amazing. |
TE Lawrence was rather influential among the Arabs. He rolled with sheikhs and princes.
I understand your scepticism, but he was there and you were not. I think you're veering toward that sort of "they don't realize how unhappy they should be" progressive ideology. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 5:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Koveras wrote: |
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| few of whom made any attempt to escape, despite being unguarded and unsupervised |
I see you are not keeping up with your Stockholm Syndrome reading. |
From his description, I think it just as likely that they were acting in self-interest. As slaves their lives were better, even more 'upwardly mobile,' than what their dirt-poor fathers who sold them to begin with could have given them.
Is this 'syndrome' the blanket explanation for contented slaves? Why did some slaves develop syndromes while others didn't?
| Quote: |
| Besides, Saudi slavery was a different breed of slavery--there are various forms of it, as I'm sure you know, some even worse than others. |
Well I know about harems and eunuchs and such from Montesquieu, but not much else. I don't think any of that was exclusive to Arabia, so you must mean something else. I find that sort of thing disgusting, the eunuchs especially.
| Quote: |
| Wow. A total stranger comes to town for a couple of days, has no power whatsoever to affect the social system you are trapped in, and it's a surprise the slave doesn't pour out his heart...Amazing. |
TE Lawrence was rather influential among the Arabs. He rolled with sheikhs and princes.
I understand your scepticism, but he was there and you were not. I think you're veering toward that sort of "they don't realize how unhappy they should be" progressive ideology. |
| Quote: |
| As slaves their lives were better |
Ummm...could you elaborate? And whether their dad sold them (as sometimes did happen) or whether they were captured, how is that relevant to the slave? Would you be better off if your dad had sold you when you were a kid?
I guess I have to ask: Would you personally be happier if you were a eunuch or a sex slave of some...over-weight half-educated red-neck rube? Do tell. I'd love to hear how you would prefer 3 square meals a day in return for your family jewels...but the thread is not about middle-eastern forms of slavery.
Something tells me that you would be in the market for a teenage sex slave you could keep buried in a box in the back yard when you weren't using him/her.
| Quote: |
TE Lawrence was rather influential among the Arabs. He rolled with sheikhs and princes.
|
TE had a lot more influence on post-Victorian sex fantasies than he ever did on actual civilized people wherever they were from. No doubt it came from rolling with the shieks...the ones who got off on spanking him. I don't know why, but I find his sexual hang-ups less than enlightening on the subject of American slavery than you do. Perhaps you could give us chapter and verse on your take on the subject of bondage. No doubt you have given it more up close and personal thought than most posters here at Dave's. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koveras
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 6:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Koveras wrote: |
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| few of whom made any attempt to escape, despite being unguarded and unsupervised |
I see you are not keeping up with your Stockholm Syndrome reading. |
From his description, I think it just as likely that they were acting in self-interest. As slaves their lives were better, even more 'upwardly mobile,' than what their dirt-poor fathers who sold them to begin with could have given them.
Is this 'syndrome' the blanket explanation for contented slaves? Why did some slaves develop syndromes while others didn't?
| Quote: |
| Besides, Saudi slavery was a different breed of slavery--there are various forms of it, as I'm sure you know, some even worse than others. |
Well I know about harems and eunuchs and such from Montesquieu, but not much else. I don't think any of that was exclusive to Arabia, so you must mean something else. I find that sort of thing disgusting, the eunuchs especially.
| Quote: |
| Wow. A total stranger comes to town for a couple of days, has no power whatsoever to affect the social system you are trapped in, and it's a surprise the slave doesn't pour out his heart...Amazing. |
TE Lawrence was rather influential among the Arabs. He rolled with sheikhs and princes.
I understand your scepticism, but he was there and you were not. I think you're veering toward that sort of "they don't realize how unhappy they should be" progressive ideology. |
| Quote: |
| As slaves their lives were better |
Ummm...could you elaborate? And whether their dad sold them (as sometimes did happen) or whether they were captured, how is that relevant to the slave? Would you be better off if your dad had sold you when you were a kid? |
I can't say. If my dad were both poor and the type of dad who's willing to sell his children, it's quite possible I would have been better off as a slave.
| Quote: |
| I guess I have to ask: Would you personally be happier if you were a eunuch or a sex slave of some...over-weight half-educated red-neck rube? Do tell. I'd love to hear how you would prefer 3 square meals a day in return for your family jewels...but the thread is not about middle-eastern forms of slavery. |
No I wouldn't.
| Quote: |
| Something tells me that you would be in the market for a teenage sex slave you could keep buried in a box in the back yard when you weren't using him/her. |
No, I wouldn't.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
TE Lawrence was rather influential among the Arabs. He rolled with sheikhs and princes.
|
TE had a lot more influence on post-Victorian sex fantasies than he ever did on actual civilized people wherever they were from. No doubt it came from rolling with the shieks...the ones who got off on spanking him. I don't know why, but I find his sexual hang-ups less than enlightening on the subject of American slavery than you do. Perhaps you could give us chapter and verse on your take on the subject of bondage. No doubt you have given it more up close and personal thought than most posters here at Dave's. |
You brought up his sexual hang-ups, not me. Given that he was anally raped by red-necked rubes, I would expect you to be showing him a little more sympathy and a little less ridicule. If by bondage you mean human bondage, then I've already been giving you my take on it. If by bondage you mean sex with chains and whips et al, if you're so interested in hearing about other peoples' sexual escapades, perhaps you're on the wrong site.
And I'd like you to answer my questions about your syndrome. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 6:36 am Post subject: for happiness |
|
|
If anyone out there is interested in being a happy slave, I just happen to be in the market.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 7:53 am Post subject: Re: for happiness |
|
|
| bacasper wrote: |
If anyone out there is interested in being a happy slave, I just happen to be in the market.
|
Who was it that asserted that before you can command you must first learn to serve? Would you care to tell us about your past, ba? It's Friday and a kinky post could be entertaining. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManintheMiddle
Joined: 20 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yo-Yo Boy retorted:
| Quote: |
| I think it demonstrates you have a shallow idea of slavery and undercuts your later comment: |
If so, I'd rather be shallow than completely uninformed or willful, as thou most surely are on this manufactured issue.
Get a copy of Margaret Walker's novel Jubilee and you might just see the light. But first you'll have to look up who she is and what she did with her life as I'm sure you don't know. Then you'll need to set aside the fact that it's written in a fiction genre. Finally, you'll have to remove your head from your posterior. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Koveras
Joined: 09 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 7:51 pm Post subject: Re: for happiness |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
If anyone out there is interested in being a happy slave, I just happen to be in the market.
|
Who was it that asserted that before you can command you must first learn to serve? Would you care to tell us about your past, ba? It's Friday and a kinky post could be entertaining. |
It was Nietzsche. Youre mighty eager to hear the sexcapades of young men, aren't you? You dirty old dog. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
itaewonguy
Joined: 25 Mar 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 11:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ill have no objections to being Lee Hyo Ri's sex slave!
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 18, 2009 11:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Koveras wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| Koveras wrote: |
| The justification or condemnation of slavery depends not in any way on the feelings of the slaves. In other words, happy slaves don't justify slavery, and unhappy slaves don't condemn it. |
I do think unhappy slaves, in the sense that slavery made them feel unhappy, is a point against slavery, yes. |
1) Then 'the slaves whom slavery made to feel happier' (a rather nebulous cause and effect, like yours) are 'a point for slavery'.
2) If the justification is based on feelings, there's nothing absolutely immoral about slavery, and it becomes an calculation between specific masters and slaves. Perhaps you agree with that, after all. |
Point 1 is not necessarily true, but even if it were, I'm not entirely uncomfortable with it. If slaves are made happier, yes, its a point for slavery. I don't think slavery would win down the whole score list, however.
Point 2 is just wrong. I'm not basing the justification entirely on feelings, but yes, the feelings of slaves are relevant to the discussion. Its not true that if we consider feelings, it supplants the objective morality of the discussion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 19, 2009 12:12 am Post subject: Re: for happiness |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| bacasper wrote: |
If anyone out there is interested in being a happy slave, I just happen to be in the market.
|
Who was it that asserted that before you can command you must first learn to serve? Would you care to tell us about your past, ba? It's Friday and a kinky post could be entertaining. |
Actually, I'd love to detail my extensive past of making my "slaves" happy. After all, I am a professional in "education," am I not?  Unfortunately, Dave might not approve.
| Koveras wrote: |
| It was Nietzsche. Youre mighty eager to hear the sexcapades of young men, aren't you? You dirty old dog. |
Never thought I'd see myself coming to Yat's defense, but that doesn't make him a bad person.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
