The place to ask China-related questions!
Beijing Shanghai Guangzhou Shenzhen Chengdu Xi'an Hangzhou Qingdao Dalian Suzhou Nanjing More Cities>>

Categories

Close
Welcome to eChinacities Answers! Please or register if you wish to join conversations or ask questions relating to life in China. For help, click here.
X

Verify email

Your verification code has been sent to:

Didn`t receive your code? Resend code

By continuing you agree to eChinacities's Privacy Policy .

Sign up with Google Sign up with Facebook
Sign up with Email Already have an account? .
Posts: 1142

Shifu

0
2
You must be a registered user to vote!
You must be a registered user to vote!
2

Q: Samsar, Orwell, and Vodka

Samsara, who I usually agree with, dislikes, well hates religion, and objective morality.

Myself, I argue that objective morality exists, and is a metaphysical truth.

China, is a a hole because they work against objective truth. 

Therefore the reality that exists, in China, is namely evil, a perversion of what is good, or true, or beautiful.

So my question is this...on what grounds does Samsara criticize China? Whose ethics? Whose morals? Is Samsara a western apologist and chauvinist?

Also, I drank today...my wife's uncle has cancer, and is only 59. Heavy drinker and smoker though....

 

8 years 32 weeks ago in  Lifestyle - China

 
Highest Voted
Posts: 3269

Emperor

2
2
You must be a registered user to vote!
You must be a registered user to vote!
0

Interesting that you lumped together "good, true and beautiful". Beauty is an excellent example to demonstrate that morality is not objective nor universal.

Babies have been proven to recognize beauty straight after birth, which might suggest the human race has a universal, objective definition of beauty, and all that "eye of the beholder" stuff is bunk.

We like beauty even more than we like sex or wealth. Our sexual selection is influenced by Neoteny; wanting youthful, attractive partners. We like and trust people with smooth, light skin and symmetric features more than hairy, darker skinned people with physical imperfections.

In China, the pursuit of light skin takes epic proportions. This pursuit of beauty may be seen as an attempt to appear more trustworthy than is warranted. It may even be perceived as an earned ability in China.

People with darker skin are (sub)consciously disadvantaged in every culture. A preference for light skin is found everywhere, from South America, Africa to Asia. The West makes a slight exception because tanned skin looks more sophisticated and leisurely than pale skin in societies where the average worker is indoors. But even I am guilty of distinguishing between a tanned white man and a light-skinned Latino - the perceived trustworthiness drops instantly if I realize I'm dealing with the latter.

Now, morality is supposed to work on merit - your ACTIONS should determine how you are perceived. But we judge people by things they ARE and cannot change. We expect them to behave in accordance with stereotypes of their race and culture. A black man may receive patronizing compliments for hard work/professionalism from white people, with an element of surprise, as if he did something atypical. OTOH, a black criminal is immediately perceived as hardened, strong and violent - few people would dare call him weak. Things are different for a small Asian criminal - we might be unable to feel fear for his cute face, and we may suffer the consequences for our judgement clouded by appearances.

White people in China are expected to be lazy, incompetent, privileged, culturally naive, open, free, honest, racist, horny, wealthy, leisurely and arrogant. Some of these stereotypes maycome as a shock to FOBs, who have trouble adjusting to new expectations. This is because of the importance of adhering to people's assumptions of you.

We may not realize this, but challenging people's assumptions (of you) meets with direct and indirect resistance, penalties and other negative consequences everywhere in the world. It is most apparent in undynamic culture that focus heavily on static appearances (beauty, harmony) than on actions or merit.

Nobody cares about you, or the assumptions and pre-judgements you are bound to. When you challenge such assumptions, you bring others out of their comfort zone for little benefit to themselves. At least the West values the notion of challenging one's own assumptions, but it took decades of multicultural society to get even this far, and there are still detractors who believe we gained nothing from multiculturalism.

Is there a speciesist morality? Absolutely. If females devoured males for nutrients after copulation, we'd be horrified, while sentient Praying Mantis would defend the custom with rational arguments. If gorillas could defend their society, they would speak of the benefits of having one silverback alpha male calling the shots and mating exclusively with all females during his reign. Chimpanzee females might claim the benefits of genetic diversity for allowing more than just the alpha to have opportunities to mate, and the males would mention that it's more fair to them. But even the non-alpha male gorillas would judge such infidelity as undermining their social order - it's in their genes to feel this way. They'd prefer to hope for a chance to become an alpha themselves one day. The sentient Praying Mantis would scoff at the culturally inferior species' petty disagreement; fidelity is not an issue for them.

Even among genders, morality changes. Men and women have different notions of what's important to social ethics. Women will sooner lament conflicts with rising death tolls, quickly deeming the cost in lives and instability not worth it anymore; life must go on for childbearing women. Men, who can still have healthy children when they are elderly, will be more inclined to fight on against oppression for decades. Which is the objective truth?

There is no objective truth, no objective morality, but there is objective beauty. Sometimes objectivity is overrated.

Scandinavian:

do you have a source on the babies recognizing beauty part ? 

Also, I would venture that the preference for symmetry is biological whereas the preference for light skin is cultural. Per definition we all come from dark skin, and I would be thoroughly surprised if all of the African continent has fairskinned as the pinacle of desire

8 years 32 weeks ago
Report Abuse

coineineagh:

Irrespective of white people, black culture also favours the lighter skinned members of their own society. They consider them leaders, desirable, respectable, everything that Chinese culture does. The lightest sibling always ranks as most important to the family regardless of age or gender. Light skin is linked to youth, which humans have a strong sexual selection for. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/beauty-is-in-the-brain-not-the-beholders-eye-just-ask-a-baby-6162301.html https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6355-babies-prefer-to-gaze-upon-beautiful-faces/ http://www.theguardian.com/science/2004/sep/06/science.research2

8 years 32 weeks ago
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
8 years 32 weeks ago
 
Answers (7)
Comments (7)
Posts: 879

Emperor

1
2
You must be a registered user to vote!
You must be a registered user to vote!
1

 

I approve!

 

As the foremost authority on me, I will get to work on a lengthy response.

 

Hotwater:

We'll all await it with baited breath!

8 years 32 weeks ago
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
8 years 32 weeks ago
 
Posts: 7715

Emperor

0
0
You must be a registered user to vote!
You must be a registered user to vote!
0

I think there's a middle ground that never really seems to get suggested (having done a double major in philosophy as my degree, I think I would have come across it somewhere...).

 

There is, generally speaking, two categories/theories regarding morals/ethics (which get confused) - Relative and Absolute. There's not really this idea that there might be a Speciesist version of morality... in which 'morals' are determined by one's species. By only considering the first 2 options, we start to put moral questions or arguments into areas they may not apply... (or not put moral questions...).

 

As a very quick and easy example - is 'God' subject to the same moral principals as humans? If 'God; kills a person willy-nilly, is that ok?What about different gods in a polytheistic pantheon? Zeus was renowned for raping women and having children on them. Is a god of war allowed to do all that killing?

 

Why do some animals kill for pleasure? - wouldn't that be 'immoral'?

 

Personally, I do think there's a 'human' morality (NB: not 'ethics"). Morals are based on what actually works to the benefit of the community/society. And for the growth and improvement of that community/society. Clearly, what happens in Chinese society can't be called 'working', and definitely isn't an 'improvement'.

Report Abuse
8 years 32 weeks ago
 
Posts: 1300

Shifu

1
1
You must be a registered user to vote!
You must be a registered user to vote!
0

I meant this originally as a comment for shining_brow but I'll post as an answer for general consideration: 

 

What defines a community? A few families in a neighborhood? A state? A country? 

 

How do you measure growth/improvement in a society? Growth in GDP? Education? Population? Demographic homogeneousness or diversity?

 

Can different communities/societies have different standards of morality? In some primitive African societies human slaves are sold for cannibalism. Are the African slaves part of the society that eats them? Was Hitler wrong for killing the Jews who weren't ethnically German and were viewed as subhuman?

 

Is planned parenthood wrong for dismembering and selling aborted babies for parts without the parents' consent? Is abortion murder or are babies suddenly people with rights after passing the birth canal? 

 

If there is no absolute moral standard, your answers to moral questions are your own opinion or because your community or society says it is so. 

Shining_brow:

Thanks for not 'commenting' on me - this deserves its own post & comments!

 

Q: do you think that we (whoever 'we' is) has the 'right' to judge others? (morals & actions are directly connected)

8 years 32 weeks ago
Report Abuse

hi2u:

"do you think that we (whoever 'we' is) has the 'right' to judge others?"

 

What do you mean by judge? If there is a moral standard, it must be better for everyone if we all aim for that in our lives.

 

"morals & actions are directly connected" 

 

Yes, this is exactly right. Your actions are influenced by your morals. Most of us grew up with a culture influenced by Judeo-Christian values. What do you say to someone who treats women like slaves because his culture teaches him that women are less equal men? His culture and his morality is just different that yours. Without any moral standard, you have no right to tell him that he is wrong. 

8 years 32 weeks ago
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
8 years 32 weeks ago
 
Posts: 3269

Emperor

2
2
You must be a registered user to vote!
You must be a registered user to vote!
0

Interesting that you lumped together "good, true and beautiful". Beauty is an excellent example to demonstrate that morality is not objective nor universal.

Babies have been proven to recognize beauty straight after birth, which might suggest the human race has a universal, objective definition of beauty, and all that "eye of the beholder" stuff is bunk.

We like beauty even more than we like sex or wealth. Our sexual selection is influenced by Neoteny; wanting youthful, attractive partners. We like and trust people with smooth, light skin and symmetric features more than hairy, darker skinned people with physical imperfections.

In China, the pursuit of light skin takes epic proportions. This pursuit of beauty may be seen as an attempt to appear more trustworthy than is warranted. It may even be perceived as an earned ability in China.

People with darker skin are (sub)consciously disadvantaged in every culture. A preference for light skin is found everywhere, from South America, Africa to Asia. The West makes a slight exception because tanned skin looks more sophisticated and leisurely than pale skin in societies where the average worker is indoors. But even I am guilty of distinguishing between a tanned white man and a light-skinned Latino - the perceived trustworthiness drops instantly if I realize I'm dealing with the latter.

Now, morality is supposed to work on merit - your ACTIONS should determine how you are perceived. But we judge people by things they ARE and cannot change. We expect them to behave in accordance with stereotypes of their race and culture. A black man may receive patronizing compliments for hard work/professionalism from white people, with an element of surprise, as if he did something atypical. OTOH, a black criminal is immediately perceived as hardened, strong and violent - few people would dare call him weak. Things are different for a small Asian criminal - we might be unable to feel fear for his cute face, and we may suffer the consequences for our judgement clouded by appearances.

White people in China are expected to be lazy, incompetent, privileged, culturally naive, open, free, honest, racist, horny, wealthy, leisurely and arrogant. Some of these stereotypes maycome as a shock to FOBs, who have trouble adjusting to new expectations. This is because of the importance of adhering to people's assumptions of you.

We may not realize this, but challenging people's assumptions (of you) meets with direct and indirect resistance, penalties and other negative consequences everywhere in the world. It is most apparent in undynamic culture that focus heavily on static appearances (beauty, harmony) than on actions or merit.

Nobody cares about you, or the assumptions and pre-judgements you are bound to. When you challenge such assumptions, you bring others out of their comfort zone for little benefit to themselves. At least the West values the notion of challenging one's own assumptions, but it took decades of multicultural society to get even this far, and there are still detractors who believe we gained nothing from multiculturalism.

Is there a speciesist morality? Absolutely. If females devoured males for nutrients after copulation, we'd be horrified, while sentient Praying Mantis would defend the custom with rational arguments. If gorillas could defend their society, they would speak of the benefits of having one silverback alpha male calling the shots and mating exclusively with all females during his reign. Chimpanzee females might claim the benefits of genetic diversity for allowing more than just the alpha to have opportunities to mate, and the males would mention that it's more fair to them. But even the non-alpha male gorillas would judge such infidelity as undermining their social order - it's in their genes to feel this way. They'd prefer to hope for a chance to become an alpha themselves one day. The sentient Praying Mantis would scoff at the culturally inferior species' petty disagreement; fidelity is not an issue for them.

Even among genders, morality changes. Men and women have different notions of what's important to social ethics. Women will sooner lament conflicts with rising death tolls, quickly deeming the cost in lives and instability not worth it anymore; life must go on for childbearing women. Men, who can still have healthy children when they are elderly, will be more inclined to fight on against oppression for decades. Which is the objective truth?

There is no objective truth, no objective morality, but there is objective beauty. Sometimes objectivity is overrated.

Scandinavian:

do you have a source on the babies recognizing beauty part ? 

Also, I would venture that the preference for symmetry is biological whereas the preference for light skin is cultural. Per definition we all come from dark skin, and I would be thoroughly surprised if all of the African continent has fairskinned as the pinacle of desire

8 years 32 weeks ago
Report Abuse

coineineagh:

Irrespective of white people, black culture also favours the lighter skinned members of their own society. They consider them leaders, desirable, respectable, everything that Chinese culture does. The lightest sibling always ranks as most important to the family regardless of age or gender. Light skin is linked to youth, which humans have a strong sexual selection for. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/beauty-is-in-the-brain-not-the-beholders-eye-just-ask-a-baby-6162301.html https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6355-babies-prefer-to-gaze-upon-beautiful-faces/ http://www.theguardian.com/science/2004/sep/06/science.research2

8 years 32 weeks ago
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
8 years 32 weeks ago
 
Posts: 7178

Emperor

0
0
You must be a registered user to vote!
You must be a registered user to vote!
0

Sorry to hear about your wife's uncle. I guess the question about morality is about the difficult decisions you have to make now regarding treatment etc. How much money is a life worth etc. I had similar at one point but not on the same scale as your family have to deal with.

In a moral society, health care would be paid for by all, so the people who need it most would get it.

China is awful in that respect. No sense of community really.

I wish you well with the difficult decisions you and your family have to make rasklnik.

Report Abuse
8 years 32 weeks ago
 
Posts: 9631

Emperor

0
0
You must be a registered user to vote!
You must be a registered user to vote!
0

China is a hole not because of its people or its lack of religion. China is a hole because an opportunist was able to grab power at the right time and this person was ruthless enough to hang on to power and hand it over to equally ruthless people. Much like religion, the party promises a lot to its followers and eternal damnation (or at least crappy prison food) to those opposed. The party has one objective, its own survival. Since someone stealing, producing dangerous goods or other irresponsible things cannot be blamed on the party, because they are on the side of the good and they will punish the bad, the party becomes the God and God allows people to live in moral decay. All Chinese are good people the day they are born. 

 

You wifes uncle is sadly much worse off because of the hole that is China. I hope the best for him.

ScotsAlan:

The people are the problem. Not the party.

8 years 32 weeks ago
Report Abuse

Scandinavian:

the people should really party

8 years 32 weeks ago
Report Abuse
Report Abuse
8 years 32 weeks ago
 
Posts: 7178

Emperor

0
0
You must be a registered user to vote!
You must be a registered user to vote!
0

The party are left wing. The culture is right wing. Never the twain shall meet.

Report Abuse
8 years 32 weeks ago
 
Know the answer ?
Please or register to post answer.

Report Abuse

Security Code: * Enter the text diplayed in the box below
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <u>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Textual smileys will be replaced with graphical ones.

More information about formatting options

Forward Question

Answer of the DayMORE >>
A:  "... through ..."?  Only "through" comes to mind is "S
A: "... through ..."?  Only "through" comes to mind is "Shenzhen agent can connect you with an employer, who's authorized to hire waigouren ... and can sponsor Z visa." It's not like every 10th person you meet in Shenzhen's hood can sponsor work visa ...  The only way to change from student to labourer visa is just a regular way by: 1. Finding an employer, who'll apply for an Invitation letter; 2. Exit China and apply for Z visa in your home country's Chinese embassy; 3. Enter China in 30-days after Z visa was stamped into your travelling instrument ...As I am aware, you won't be able to switch to Working permit by remaining in China....,so make ready for a return to your home .... -- icnif77