[-]
use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
subreddit:subreddit
find submissions in "subreddit"
author:username
find submissions by "username"
site:example.com
find submissions from "example.com"
url:text
search for "text" in url
selftext:text
search for "text" in self post contents
self:yes (or self:no)
include (or exclude) self posts
nsfw:yes (or nsfw:no)
include (or exclude) results marked as NSFW
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
this post was submitted on Submitted on
12 points (80% upvoted)
shortlink:
reset password

changemyview

subscribeSubscribe to CMVunsubscribe603,940 subscribers readers
1,452 here now users here now
Submit a CMV post
Deltas from Popular Topics
Search CMV
What is /r/changemyview?
A place to post an opinion you accept may be flawed, in an effort to understand other perspectives on the issue. Enter with a mindset for conversation, not debate.
More Detail

Message the Moderators

CMV Podcast Episodes

Submission Ruleshover over sections for more info

' ', counter(4.12948e-316)Explain the reasoning behind your view, not just what that view is (500+ characters required). ▾ ' ', counter(4.12948e-316)Note: if your view is about a "double standard", please see the guidelines here. [More]
' ', counter(4.12948e-316)You must personally hold the view and demonstrate that you are open to it changing.▾ ' ', counter(4.12948e-316)A post cannot be made on behalf of others, for playing devil's advocate, or to "soapbox". Posts by throwaway accounts must be approved through modmail. [More]
' ', counter(4.12948e-316)Submission titles must adequately sum up your view and include "CMV:" at the beginning. ▾ ' ', counter(4.12948e-316)Posts with misleading/overly-simplistic titles may be removed. [More]
' ', counter(4.12948e-316)Posts cannot express a neutral stance, suggest harm against a specific person, be self-promotional, or discuss this subreddit (visit r/ideasforcmv instead). ▾ ' ', counter(4.12948e-316)No view is banned from CMV based on popularity or perceived offensiveness, but the above types of post are disallowed for practical reasons. [More]
' ', counter(4.12948e-316)Only post if you are willing to have a conversation with those who reply to you, and are available to start doing so within 3 hours of posting. ▾ ' ', counter(4.12948e-316)If you haven't replied during this time, your post will be removed. [More]

Comment Ruleshover over sections for more info

' ', counter(4.12945e-316)Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. ▾ ' ', counter(4.12945e-316)Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [More]
' ', counter(4.12945e-316)Don't be rude or hostile to other users. ▾ ' ', counter(4.12945e-316)Your comment will be removed even if the rest of it is solid. 'They started it' is not an excuse. You should report, not retaliate. [More]
' ', counter(4.12945e-316)Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith. ▾ ' ', counter(4.12945e-316)If you are unsure whether someone is genuine, ask clarifying questions (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [More]
' ', counter(4.12945e-316)Award a delta if you've acknowledged a change in your view. Do not use deltas for any other purpose. ▾ ' ', counter(4.12945e-316)You must include an explanation of the change along with the delta so we know it's genuine. Delta abuse includes sarcastic deltas, joke deltas, super-upvote deltas, etc. [More]
' ', counter(4.12945e-316)Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation. ▾ ' ', counter(4.12945e-316)Comments that are only links, jokes, or "written upvotes" will be removed. Humor and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments. [More]
The Delta System
Whether you're the OP or not, please reply to the user(s) that change your view to any degree with a delta in your comment (instructions below), and also include an explanation of the change. Full details.

&

Method: For:
Copy/paste⇨ Δ All Systems
Unicode⇨ ∆ All Systems
Option/Alt+J Mac
Ctrl+Shift+u2206 Linux
!delta When you can't use Δ
/u/DeltaBot will maintain delta counts in user flair, wiki pages for each user's delta history, record deltas in /r/DeltaLog, and update deltaboards where necessary.
How to not earn a delta:
Anti-delta Approach.
Please report cases of delta abuse/misuse, accidental deltas, and failed delta attempts.
Code on GitHub:
DeltaBot / CMVModBot
Monthly Deltaboard
Rank Username Deltas
1 AnythingApplied 13
2 PreacherJudge 12
3 sleepyfoxteeth 9
4 shibbyhornet28 9
5 Huntingmoa 9
6 GnosticGnome 8
7 cacheflow 8
8 David4194d 8
9 huadpe 7
10 Bladefall 6
As of 9/22/2018 19:04:32 UTC
More Deltaboards
Fresh Topic Friday
On Fridays, posts can't be highly similar to any other in the past month, and won't show up in the new queue until they've been checked and approved by a moderator. FTF is an attempt to reduce topic fatigue.
More Information
We have compiled lots of useful information such as full explanations of our rules, CMV etiquette, archives, research papers on CMV, and some more general information about the subreddit in our wiki.
For anyone interested in how we moderate this subreddit, we have our approach laid out over at our mod standards page.
If you are interested in the growing network of CMV-related pursuits, check out changemyview.net

created by Snorrrlaxa community for

Welcome to Reddit.

Where a community about your favorite things is waiting for you.
Become a Redditor
and subscribe to one of thousands of communities.
×
11
12
13
"The strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must." -Thucydides, c.400 BC
I strongly desire to see a more just, caring, fair, and benevolent world. And yet the more I examine the way the world works, the more it's obvious that this is almost logically impossible.
If might doesn't make right - i.e., if there's some sort of "rightness" other than what happens, then whatever is meant by "rightness" has no functional bearing on the real world.
If you believe something "should" happen, then either you have the power to enforce what you think "should" happen, or what you think "should" happen doesn't actually matter.
(Obviously, soft power - such as the ability to elicit sympathy from others who can form a coalition with you to increase your ability to enforce change - counts just as much as hard power does).
This succinctly explains much of what we see in the world. Uncharismatic people are punished more than charismatic people, because they don't have the power to make other people enforce their so-called views of "fairness". Rich people get away with more than poor people, because their positions of power and privilege make it more difficult to punish them. Police can do things that private citizens would never dream of trying, because nemo custodit ipso custodes.
The answer to every social injustice in the world, at the bottom, seems to be "oh yeah? well who's gonna stop me?"
Please change my mind.
all 44 comments
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points  (22 children)
Aren't you making the assumption that if someone values ethics they agree with the world they live in?
If you believe something "should" happen, then either you have the power to enforce what you think "should" happen, or what you think "should" happen doesn't actually matter.
What if I could convince you that the world was screwed up because we don't have ethics? Am I using power over you?
[–]ialdabaoth[S] 2 points3 points4 points  (21 children)
Aren't you making the assumption that if someone values ethics they agree with the world they live in?
If someone values ethics and does not agree with the world they live in, but cannot change it, then what does it matter whether they value ethics or not?
What if I could convince you that the world was screwed up because we don't have ethics? Am I using power over you?
The capacity to convince others is necessarily an aspect of soft power, yes.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points  (20 children)
The capacity to convince others is necessarily an aspect of soft power, yes.
If I care about the topic; don't I gain this "soft" power to some degree simply by trying to share my views with others? What would be a good name for this power?
[–]ialdabaoth[S] 0 points1 point2 points  (19 children)
If I care about the topic; don't I gain this "soft" power to some degree simply by trying to share my views with others?
Not necessarily, if your audience doesn't care about you or your point of view.
What would be a good name for this power?
I usually call it "charisma" - or, if approached in a more systematic way, "propaganda".
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points  (18 children)
So you believe that the only thing that changes people's mind is how well it's presented?
If hitler was just a bit more charismatic the whole world would have been convinced that the murder of Jews was justified? Or is there a something else at play?
[–]ialdabaoth[S] 1 point2 points3 points  (17 children)
So you believe that the only thing that changes people's mind is how well it's presented?
How well it's presented and how succeptible they are to the idea, yes. But "how succeptible they are to the idea" is itself just a matter of what other forces are acting on them, many of which are also controllable (for example, whether they've had enough to eat, and whether they're living in fear of some real or imagined looming disaster).
If hitler was just a bit more charismatic the whole world would have been convinced that the murder of Jews was justified?
A good deal of the world almost was. Are you suggesting that there was an innate evil that existed in the hearts of Germans that was somehow lacking in the hearts of Americans and British? If so, can you explain how that happened?
Or is there a something else at play?
Yes, economic pressures and presentations of status go a long way, but those are also mostly part of "how well something is presented".
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point  (16 children)
Generally would factors would a newborn get "ethics"? How would they gain an entire model of "ethics"? Does the human brain have a bias? If so what are they generally?

Couldn't these biases the human brain has towards "ethics", and what they usually cause; be considered the study of ethics... Even if it doesn't exist in the strictest sense, it's an extremely useful concept like math; shouldnt we try to improve on extermely useful concepts?
[–]ialdabaoth[S] 0 points1 point2 points  (15 children)
Can you rephrase all that please? I'm having trouble parsing your sentences.
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point  (14 children)
Do children tend to respond to universal statements (like "don't hit") and then do they tend to self regulate their behavior based off those statements even without a fear of punishment? Why?
[–]ialdabaoth[S] 1 point2 points3 points  (13 children)
That hasn't been my experience. From what I've seen, instilling what we call 'ethics' in children seems to be primarily a function of controlling enough of their world that they have no choice but to conform to the behaviors that their parents/owners desire from them.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points  (15 children)
So I'm guessing you just read the Melian dialogues in a poli sci class?
People ultimately have morals. They're not as solid and inelastic as we like to pretend, but they exist, they motivate us.
People develop a way of behaving, and they don't like to break those norms. People, ultimately, mostly want to be happy themselves, and usually that means being around other happy people. You combine these two things, a system of morals grows out of it. The key is to shape the way that system of morals grows.
Humans as a whole will be dicks if you let us, but we'll also be pretty decent if we're helped. And fortunately, people with foresight and a desire to see the world suck less are often willing to help.
[–]ialdabaoth[S] 0 points1 point2 points  (14 children)
Actually, no; I'm 39, below the poverty line, and slowly sinking into the abyss. And I'm tired of hearing that I don't deserve help when I ask for it, so I'm desperately constructing a world-view where I'll stop asking for it.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points  (13 children)
The fact that there's no universal set of morals doesn't mean that morals don't exist. Morality is a factor in decision making. Some people's morals don't include helping anyone, or don't include helping certain people. People don't (usually) do shitty things because they think morals don't exist, everyone has their lines. People do shitty things because the lines they refuse to cross are farther away than most.
Basically, some people have morals. Some people's morals allow them to ignore helping you, other people's morals don't. That's not a reflection on you, it's a reflection on them and their worldview. I can't offer a ton of support from a random comment, but I can promise you that people do have standards, they're just not universal. I do wish you the best, and aside from the actual debate, CMV might not be the sub that's best suited to help you right now.
[–]ialdabaoth[S] 0 points1 point2 points  (7 children)
Some people's morals allow them to ignore helping you, other people's morals don't. That's not a reflection on you, it's a reflection on them and their worldview.
See, this doesn't make much sense to me. In my view, if someone doesn't want to help you, and you can't make them help you, that's absolutely a reflection on you, since you're the one who isn't helped. If you CAN make them help you, then their lack of willingness to help you IS a reflection on them, since they're the one that's being forced to help.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points  (6 children)
What do you mean by 'it's a reflection on you/them'? I'm not entirely clear on what you're saying.
[–]ialdabaoth[S] -1 points0 points1 point  (5 children)
Let me say it by metaphor:
While the Nazis are in power, Jews are evil, because what are you gonna do you stupid kike, cry about it?
When the Allies come, Jews are good, because look at what those horrible Nazis did to God's chosen people.
The only true 'evil' is powerlessness. We pay lip-service to other ethical ideas, but ultimately we treat the powerless with contempt because we can, until they stop being powerless. Then we act like they never deserved the contempt they were treated with, and act like the people who treated them with contempt were somehow evil (but only if we can make THOSE people powerless; otherwise it was all just a tragic misunderstanding).
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points  (4 children)
The Jews weren't evil to themselves. They were there to perceive what was happening. When the allies came, Jews were still evil to anyone still buying into Nazi ideology.
Every Nazi who shot a Jewish person did make a choice- there were strong, complicated factors influencing those choices, but they did at some point decide that they valued something more than the ability to say that they hadn't shot a Jewish person. Maybe their idea of the worth of certain things shifted over time, but morality certainly played into the decision.
Morality isn't universal and static. And your morality won't really influence how others behave. But it determines what choices you make, and how you experience and interact with the world. It's not worthless or nonexistant, it's just not universal and static.
[–]ialdabaoth[S] 0 points1 point2 points  (3 children)
When the allies came, Jews were still evil to anyone still buying into Nazi ideology.
Yes, but those people no longer had control of the gas chambers, which seems to me to be the important part.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points  (2 children)
It's a practically important matter that doesn't disprove the existence of morals. It proves the existence of conflicting sets of morals. Jews still made decisions based on their moral codes, so did Nazis. Morals were still influencing human behavior.
As an imperfect analogy, it's raining outside where I live. It's not raining where my brother lives. That doesn't disprove the existence of weather, and that doesn't mean that we won't use the weather we experience to determine what clothes we wear outside.
[–]ialdabaoth[S] 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
Yes, but you'll note my argument isn't precisely that morals don't exist in the sense of "things that influence human behavior"; it's that, if you don't have the power to enforce them, what good are they?
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
After reading through the whole thread I think I get what you're saying.
I agree that "might makes right," but I would also say that, increasingly more these days, "right makes might."
If you're doing something bad, it's going to catch up with you. Either through protests or divorces or revenge of another sort. From what I can tell, being "unethical," is, essentially, taking what isn't yours and being a selfish dick about it (taking life, money, love, property, etc). Though there's generally always unethical things happening, just as often those who are being unethical are getting a comeuppance of some sort. Negative behavior begets negative reactions. Tyrants fall, cheaters get dumped, flakes get fired, and so on.
Yes, those in power can attempt to crush any insurgence, but in the end revolution always occurs. We haven't seen a big, righteous revolution in a while, but they definitely happen, otherwise we'd still be total savages.
You can see there's a larger shift at play, away from this imbalance of greedy assholes getting their say while oppressing the poor. We see blatant failings on Wall St., in gov'ts across the planet; basically everything which is built on deception and power plays is blatantly showing it's cracks. Furthermore, as information becomes more free there will be more disruption of the tyrannical status quo.
The trick to winning the game is changing the rules. "The Man" has set a very specific rulebook involving forced miseducation, life-sucking factory-style careers, and depressing retirements.
These rules are unnatural, and shouldn't be followed. My personal rulebook is entirely different from what they distribute to the masses, and as such I have an entirely different lifestyle than the typical person, one that is infinitely satisfying and joyous.
tl;dr: You're correct, but not about your position in the hierarchy. Find the thing that makes you powerful and you will gain control. Freedom is a choice.
[–]Thanquee1∆ 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
I agree with you on demand-side ethics, that is, ethics that demands that you act a certain way for the benefit of others. But I still think a supply-side ethics that demands that you act a certain way for your own benefit can exist.
Consider the following: I, in the course of my daily life, make choices. If I am choosing between two options, A and B, then the choosing itself is an action. The action must have some end. The end my choosing serves can't be A, because otherwise there would be no choosing - I would simply act - and it can't be B for the same reason. It can't be 'A or B' because I might as well flip a coin and not even bother with reasoning it through if the outcome I'm trying to get to is considered the same for both. So it has to be some third thing. The end all choosing serves is personal fulfilment, 'eudaimonia'.
So we can say 'since you have this ultimate end of eudaimonia, and since it is possible to figure out how to get closer to feeling fulfilled, you should act in the following way in order to achieve that end:' and then give you our view of what that way is, and that's a virtue ethics framework where you give a list of virtues a person should follow in order to make themselves feel fulfilled. So, things like bravery, wit, beneficence, justice and so on. You don't do these things for the benefit of others, except as a means to your own fulfilment. So you should give to charity and so on, but without ever sacrificing your self interest.
Whether you call that supply-side morality 'ethics' or not is your choice, but it's been called that for a few thousand years.
[–]electricmink15∆ 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
"Might makes right" and a "just, caring, fair, benevolent world" are not mutually exclusive. Consider:
Two weaklings with a rock and a decent plan can defeat the mightiest thug working alone.
In order to work together, everyone involved must make certain concessions to each other: I won't kill you, I won't steal your shit, I've got your back when you're in trouble so long as you show willing to get mine as well, and so on.
As time goes on, the concessions made to the whole circle an optimum balance between self-determination/freedom and obligation to the collective. The smarter we get, the more we understand the nature of the social contract we voluntarily bind ourselves to, and the more we prune unneeded obligations from it while we refine and strengthen the obligations most important to make it work (creating the single biggest cohesive collective we can as a species that is happy enough it is unlikely to break apart, smart enough to know why the social contract is important to every individual involved, yet altruistic enough to elicit some level of sacrifice from all its members who are capable to help those who are in trouble out of their bad situations as effectively as possible.
Thus, ultimately, "might makes right" leads us inexorably toward a cooperative, altruistic society that maximizes individual members' chance at a happy, fulfilling life while still meeting the obligation to help out the members of society who are currently in trouble.
[–]Lavarocked -1 points0 points1 point  (1 child)
This argument is REALLY weirdly circular. It makes no sense. Let me reword that for you, without changing the meaning:
"I believe making things happen makes things happen, and ethical things only happen when ethical things happen"
It's completely asinine.
Whether something good happens, whether you ignore it, whether you're a weird nihilist- none of that changes the validity of people using ethics to judge actions. You also say "ethics only matter if you can enforce them"... so what? You're making that sound like some sort of defeat. The sun only matters if it's a glowing ball of plasma. Wow, thanks. It is! Whew.
Basically, if you're going to say "up is only up when it is up" why are you also trying to talk about ethics in the same sentence?
[–]VorpalWalrus2∆ 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
I believe what allowed this is an unclear, and possibly nonsensical, definition of what ethics is. Can we get some definitions in here?
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. © 2018 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
css by /u/qtxπ Rendered by PID 5589 on r2-app-0a6d0b46eb6e7e6ce at 2018-09-22 19:07:09.140339+00:00 running f3d9f21 country code: NL.
Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies.  Learn More
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%